Brown et al. (2020) explained that the decisions
of today are based on estimates of what the future will be. As such, it is
important to identify up-and-coming trends and technologies so that futuristic
scenarios can better be envisioned. This discussion draws from the collection
of essays contained in the 2020 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report to highlight both a
technology and a trend associated with higher education. Impacting forces are
reviewed and concluding remarks focus on summarizing the main discussion
points.
Key Trend: The Economics of Climate Change
Brown et al. (2020) articulated a medley of developing trends with respect to education, noting that teaching strategies and learning practices are impacted by social, technological, economic, and political influences. Regarding the economic aspects, it was emphasized that institutions of higher education are expected to meticulously manage their operating resources so that they can cost-effectively impart knowledge to their students as well as contribute to the greater good of society. Climate change is one economic aspect that needs to be considered and Henderson, Bieler, and McKenzie (2017) emphasized that academic institutions play an essential role in addressing its widespread impacts. In addition to the way they prepare students to handle future challenges, an institution’s physical infrastructure, educational curriculum, and research priorities all affect the communities, systems, and entities with which they interact. As such, many institutions across the globe are striving to reduce their overall footprint and some are even attempting to become completely carbon-neutral within the next ten years (Brown et al., 2020).
Udas, Wolk, and Wilmking (2018) detailed the process of how Greifswald University, a German institution, transformed from a traditional system to a carbon-neutral one. Various sustainable acts were implemented as daily operations, formal courses and seminars/conferences/workshops on climate change topics were adopted, and both research and outreach efforts were aligned with the cause. This whole-university approach balanced technical changes with awareness raising knowledge. Reviewing some of the challenges that accompanied this initiative, the following forces of impediment were raised: (a) an overall reluctance of institutions to take on the necessary changes to overall organizational structure, teacher/student/administrative commitment, and everyday functional activities; (b) the political aspects at play given that some electricity contracts are dependent upon successful lobbying for renewable energy; (c) the lack of any long-term or tangible economic guarantees; and (d) the lack of guidelines, monitoring, and standards for sustainability reports. In contrast, however, certain helpful forces were also raised and the Greifswald’s shifts towards emissions reductions was supported by a strong backing of leadership, university-wide and all-level participation, and proactive students (Udas, Wolk, & Wilmking, 2018).
Vourdoubas (2019)
provided many specific details about average energy consumption in academia,
breaking down the cost and impact of various types of heating, cooling,
lighting, and other operational needs. For example, it was found that, on
average, every in-person student at an American University produces about six
to eight tons of carbon emissions. Brown et al. (2020) noted that one way to
lower this footprint would be for universities to focus more on online courses,
as this would cut out the student/teacher commuting factor. Although such a
strategy is more easily implementable than the full-on carbon-neutral goal, it
does not come without its own set of challenges. For example, in many rural
and/or under-resourced communities, remote learning is not an option because
the required technological supports are not available. Furthermore, attention
must also be given to the extreme weather events that are becoming more likely
because of climate changes. For example, widespread Californian power outages
due to natural disasters have caused lost instructions days and this also
affect online learning modules (Brown et al., 2020).
Key Technology: Artificial Intelligence
for Virtual Teaching Assistants
According
to Goel and Polepeddi (2016), the modern university trends towards massively
open online courses (MOOCs) are becoming more commonplace and resulting in
thousands of enrolling students. One issue with the large class sizes is that it
necessitates a prohibitively large number of involved teachers, and this often
results in low retention rates because of the limited availability of
interactive instructor support. To meet this challenge, a specific Georgia Tech
class designed Jill Watson (JW), a virtual teaching assistant, to respond to
student introductions, post course announcements, and even answer a certain set
of common/routine questions. In assessing the performance of JW, Goel and
Polepeddi (2016) raised several ethical questions. For example, will employment
opportunities be reduced for human teachers? Is it ever appropriate to use AI
assistants without clearly delineating those responses for which it is
responsible? Who should a student trust when in the event that an AI assistant
provides a response that contradicts that of a human classmate?
Benedetto,
Cremonesi, and Parenti (2018) detailed some of the technical challenges
associated with employing an AI assistant within the classroom. Given that the
internal mechanisms of such a tool must rely on preprocessing, post-processing,
and student-learning techniques, it becomes clear that most assistants are not
a one-size-fits-all kind of solution. Many factors influence an assistant’s
performance, such as course objectives, class size, assignment type, and method
of delivery. Does this mean that every type of course needs to develop its own
model for constructing an AI-based assistant? If so, the technological and
resourcing demands become very high.
Conclusion
In
conclusion, the educational system is influenced by the economic, political,
social, and technological trends of the modern world; as noted by Brown et al.
(2020), schools do not exist in a vacuum. As such, educational practices and
curriculums are challenged to keep pace with the surrounding global
developments. While these advancements often usher in an array of benefits,
issues also surface. Future research is warranted to continue figuring out how
to overcome these hurdles so that the power of technology can be fully
harnessed.
References
Benedetto, L.,
Cremonesi, P., & Parenti, M. (2018). A virtual teaching assistant for
personalized learning. Proceedings of the CIKM 2018 Workshops: International
Workshop on Social Interaction-based Recommendation, 51. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2482/paper51.pdf
Brown, M.,
McCormack, M., Reeves, J., Brooks, C., Grajek, S., Alexander, B., … &
Weber, N. (2020). 2020 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and learning
edition. Louisville, CO: EDUCAUSE.
Goel, A. K.,
Polepeddi, L. (2016). Jill Watson: A virtual teaching assistant for online
education. Learning Engineering for Online Education: Theoretical Contexts
and Design-Based Examples, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351186193-7
Henderson, J.,
Bieler, A., & McKenzie, M. (2017). Climate change and the Canadian higher
education system: An institutional policy analysis. Canadian Journal of
Higher Education, 47(1), 1-26. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1140037.pdf
Udas, E., Wolk,
M., & Wilmking, M. (2018). The carbon-neutral university: A study from
Germany. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 19(1),
130-145. https://doi.org/10.1109/ijshe-05-2017-0089
Vourdoubas, J.
(2019). Energy consumption and carbon emissions in an academic institution in
Greece: Can it become carbon neutral? Studies in Engineering and Technology,
6(1), 16-23. https://doi.org/10.11114/set.v6i1.4013
Comments
Post a Comment