Alex Clay
Summary:
\nIn the article, Dr. Edge describes his personal experience having his students use Omeka. His overall experience was very positive and how it had a good influence on his students.
\nMain Argument:
\nDr. Edge argues that Omeka is a useful tool for research and for teaching students useful skills regarding research,
\nQuestions:
\nFirst, what do the digital galleries created with Omeka look like?
\nSecond, would it be better to start teaching all students to use Omeka?
\nThemes:
\nI. Omeka is a useful tool for researching.
II. Introductory courses should be used to teach more than just introductory knowledge, but also skills useful in the future.
Quotes:
\n“Introductory-level classes can do far more than cover the basics of the field; they can also imbue our students with technological and research skills that carry over into all of their future studies.\"
\nThis quote is one that I whole heartedly agree with. We should use, not merely introductory courses, all courses to teach skills, and in such a technology centric world, we should teach skills regarding that as well.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nOverall analysis: Overall, this reading is quite informative. It is the personal experience of a professor who had his students use Omeka for one of their major assignments. One of the best ways to encourage other educators to not only use Omeka, but also get their students to use it, is through personal anecdotes. From that lens this article provides a very positive experience that will encourage others.
\nGrace Stewart
Summary:
\nThis reading breaks down the different abilities BlueSky can do, along with how to use many of its features. Much of the article describes why BlueSky is a good alternative to Twitter and other social media platforms, especially in regards to using it for educational purposes.
\nMain Argument:
\nThe main argument of this article was to demonstrate how BlueSky is a superior social media platform when compared to others.
\nQuestions:
\nIs BlueSky a consistent means of education?\nHow would audiences differentiate a reliable source from an unreliable one?\nThemes:
\nOne post on BlueSky could help in inspiring different educators, like a “Butterfly Effect,” share different ideas, pose new historical questions, and connect people from all different areas of research to focus on one point in history.\nBluesky’s decentralized model prevents control by one single company or individual, thereby reducing opportunities for propaganda, monopolization, and more mobility for users and their data.\nNo advertisements, no selling user’s data, and Bluesky’s investor-based funding suggests they avoid advertising deliberately. Unlike other social media platforms, Bluesky does not sell user’s data, making it a safer and superior social media platform, with all of its features, as opposed to other platforms like Twitter and Instagram.\nQuotes:
\n“Just like the butterfly effect, small actions on Bluesky have the potential to create a far-reaching impact\"
\nThe author using his own education journey as evidence in Bluesky as an outlet for educational purposes reinforces the idea that this platform is better than its similar competitor, Twitter. Having a platform where educated individuals can exchange ideas and create new ones is beneficial for everyone, and with technology so readily available, it should be utilized for education.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nThe level of Bluesky interaction has soared beyond Twitter and is already rapidly evolving\nBluesky’s advertisement-less model and their promises to not sell user’s data is a refreshing sight to see, because every other social media platform is constantly using user’s data to sell it to different companies.\nOverall analysis: I found this reading to be extremely valuable. I have heard of BlueSky before but have not yet tried it out for myself. I am aware of how Twitter works, and transitioning to BlueSky seems like a better option. I have never considered the impact of using social media as a means to gather ideas, garner an educational-based audience, and use this outreach to collaborate on historical hypotheses and debate different ideas among well-informed scholars. Using BlueSky as a means to educate others is a genius way of using technology to inform people on historical topics.
\n\nGrace Stewart
Summary:
\nThomas Edge conducts a project wherein he assigns his students a topic to research throughout the semester with the purpose of educating them how to use library resources. His students used Omeka to create sites filled with artifacts and different mediums of research to support their topics and analyze the materials they collected.
\nMain Argument:
\nThe main argument in this source is that Omeka is a resource that provides a challenging but favorited alternative to writing a main paper.
\nQuestions:
\nIf the Omeka assignment and the paper both achieve the same goal, that is to show students how to use their library resources, would it be better to give students the option to write a paper or do the Omeka assignment?\nHow often would something like Omeka be used in an occupational scenario?\nThemes:
\nShowing students alternatives to writing papers while achieving important goals like conducting archival research and showing them how to use library resources.\nDoing something different, like Omeka, expands students’ knowledge and discomfort threshold while not paralyzing them with tons of little assignments with a huge paper at the end of the course.\nWidening student’s variety of materials in regards to their research not only builds confidence in themselves and their topics but also introduces them to new methods or materials they can use in other classes and even in their occupational spheres.\nQuotes:
\n“They are aware of how to find and consume media, but not always of how to analyze it.\"
\nThis quote speaks to me because it’s very true. Many students do not analyze different media sources but are able to find them. Having to use all sorts of different avenues and media expands students’ media literacy in a world where media is always advancing.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nStudents are often intimidated at first when confronted with new methods of research, but can thrive when properly guided.\nDeep analysis of all sources are essential for every topic.\nOverall analysis: [Explain your final analysis of this reading - explain its value]
\nMy final analysis of this reading is that students should be taught different modes of research and data collection. Even further than that, however, is that by using varied forms of presenting materials, students are able to expand their abilities in spite of their initial discomfort. Writing papers for every class can be overwhelming and repetitive, but further than that, we don’t learn anything from doing the same thing over and over. Writing essays are something that we have practiced since middle school, so getting involved with more varied outputs of research are incredibly helpful in developing a student’s skillset.
\nCody Johnson
\nSummary:
\nThis reading was about the usefulness of omeka when it comes to researching. The Author talks about how he has started using it in his undergraduate classes to help them learn how to use library sources with a lot better gain.
\nMain Argument:
\nThe main argument of this article is that Omeka is a good tool to help students learn how to research better and get more use of the tools that their university has to offer.
\nQuestions:
\nWhat are some ways that this can be helpful to students who struggle with researching overall. \nCould techniques like this be expanded upon to help other fields of study \nThemes:
\n1. mixing Technology and Education together
\n2. Teaching students new ways to do things
\n3. How to help students who might struggle with media literacy
\nQuotes:
\nMy proudest moments, however, came from those students who were able to use these skills again in other classes, including classes they took with me. For every student who asked, “Can’t we just write a paper,” I have had many more who thanked me for challenging them and for giving them a real say in the content of their own work.
\nI think the importance of this quote is that it shows that what he is doing with his students not only works in his classes but can be used beyond them and that what he teaches is something that they feel actual pride over as it is something that they had to put real work into doing, more than what a student would feel about a paper.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nResources like this would be nothing without the library staff that digitizes this stuff and more collaboration with them as teachers can see you doing new things with your students
\nStudents will often react to projects like this with fear, but if you as the teacher help them by setting manageable project goals and helping them to understand the resources will leave the student most likely feeling a lot better at the end of the project and will probably continue to use some of the skills they learned
\nEleanor McAdon
\n**Summary:**
\nIt is easy for Americans to fall victim to misinformation online and occurs frequently. The “enemies” of the misinformative statement are most likely to spread that statement across the internet, increasing the exposure and credibility of the statement.
\n**Main Argument:**
\nIt is important to retrain our brains to distrust catchy headlines and flashy photos, along with critically viewing social medias’ algorithms as they often serve content to you in order to provoke strong emotion and engagement.
\n**Questions:**
\n1. How can we attempt to eliminate political bias in social media “fact checkers” as corporations lean farther and farther right on the political spectrum?
\n2. How can we teach digital literacy to fellow adults without making them feel defensive? How do we call in rather than call out?
\n**Themes:**
\nDigital literacy is muscle you have to flex.
\nMisinformation is prevalent everywhere.
\n**Quotes:**
\n“‘You don’t and can’t take the time and energy to examine and compare every brand of yogurt,’ says Wray Herbert, author of On Second Thought: Outsmarting Your Mind’s Hard-Wired Habits.”
\nThis quote helped me better understand how easy it is to spread misinformation and that it's more often out of laziness or comfortability than out of malice.
\n**Points worth considering:**
\nThe difference is that it has never been easier to get eyeballs on the message, nor to get enemies of the message to help spread it.
\nWith hopes of curtailing junk news, the company started attaching warnings to posts that contained claims that fact-checkers had rated as false. But a study found that this can make users more likely to believe any unflagged post.
\n**Overall analysis:** \\[Explain your final analysis of this reading - explain its value\\]
\n\tThis article was helpful in reminding readers of their own biases when it comes to viewing social media posts critically. The studies posed about engagement with misinformation serve as evidence that misinformation is easy to accept by the average American along with being easy to spread.
\nCody Johnson
\nSummary:
\nThis article is about how to detect misinformation online and gives examples of how to detect if what information you are getting is real or not.
\nMain Argument:
\nThe author's main argument is that we as a society need to make checking for misinformation as common as we check our mirrors in the car.
\nQuestions:
\nMy first question would be how did he come up with the checking the mirrors analogy as it is kind of the perfect analogy for how we need to be checking information online. \nMy second question would be how AI might affect some of these strategies and if we need to be worried about AI misinformation on a massive scale. \nThemes:
\nMisinformation is a problem that people need to be taught how to detect
\nThere are many strategies to be used to detect misinformation
\nQuotes:
\n“Once you accept that, certain things become clear. Your methods of checking have to be really quick. They have to be habitual, automatic. They can’t be cognitively expensive. And those who teach media literacy have to be conscious of this trade-off between depth and efficacy and act accordingly.\"
\nThis is the main point of his entire article is that you have to turn things like checking for misinformation as a natural habit as that will make it more likely that you actually do that as much as possible
\nPoints worth considering:
\nMisinformation is everywhere and you should always check where your information and news is coming from \nOverall analysis:
\nThe value of this article is to me the different strategies that the Author gives the readers for how to check for misinformation in ways that are not hard but rather easy that can be turned into a quick reflex.
\nCody Johnson (Late)
\nSummary:
\nThis article is about fair use and copyright in the class room and how to keep yourself safe as an educator as you make various presentations and other things for teaching purposes
\nMain Argument:
\nThe author's main argument is that more people need to know the ins and outs of copyright law for there own protection especially in the education field if you are making different products
\nQuestions:
\nMy first question is why is copyright law so complicated as a few of the rules he put in the article seem a little ridiculous. \nMy second question would be how can a teacher learn quick ways to learn the copyright for items they might want to use. \nThemes:
\nCopyright law is complex but needs to be known for your protection
\nThe ins and outs of fair use
\nQuotes:
\n“While there are a few well defined use cases in which the use of copyrighted material is definitely legal or definitely illegal in the US, there is a large gulf of practices that fall somewhere in between. In those cases, the definitive ruling of legal/illegal comes only when the copyright holder sues the party using the material and a judge rules on it\"
\nThis quote caught my attention because i feel that it is kind of strange for there to be this massive grey area with fair use that you wouldn’t even know about until you get served. I feel there should be better rules for this that leave less of it in a grey area
\nPoints worth considering:
\nKnow your copyright laws before you start creating \nOverall analysis:
\nThis article was a nice crash course on some of the basics in Copyright/Fair use law, which is something that while always talked about can sometimes be complicated. It was nice to have a rather calm and reasonable walk through of some of the ins and outs and some of the more unique parts like some of the rules and also the massive grey area that exists
\nDrew Pate
\nSummary:
\nThis article highlights the pervasiveness of misinformation on the Internet and how students and historians can better identify it to avoid wasting time or arriving at fallacious conclusions. Specifically, the author posits that students and historians could avoid misinformation by adopting the fact checker practice of reading laterally, where multiple sources (prioritizing known credible sources) are consulted.
\nMain Argument:
\nMost historians and students read unfamiliar online “vertically” by verifying the information of a website internally, but would more effectively avoid misinformation by reading “laterally” and consulting other sources to check credibility.
\nQuestions:
\nThemes:
\nQuotes:
\n“[Fact-checkers] understood the web as a maze filled with trap doors and blind alleys, where things are not always as they seem.”
\nThis quote highlights the inconsistent quality of sources online, illustrating the importance of a critical approach to arrive at accurate information. This is a new element of the digital age, and students would benefit from instructor guidance in learning how to effectively research and evaluate sources.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nOverall analysis:
\nThis article highlights the importance of verifying information online, as rampant misinformation has only become more plentiful in the digital age. Thus, educators of history would be wise to instruct their students on effective methods of verifying the credibility of sources on the Internet to help them gain a more accurate view of past and current events.
\nDrew Pate
\nSummary:
\nSteinmetz posits that misinformation is so prevalent on the Internet because its very design takes advantage of “heuristics,” or mental shortcuts people take to arrive at conclusions. Though effective solutions to combating information seem elusive, teaching students some simple methods like checking the organization behind a website and reading before sharing appear to be promising possibilities.
\nMain Argument:
\nSteinmetz argues that students should be taught to, and everyone else would be wise to, learn how to become more critical consumers of information online to promote a more productive and healthy discourse for society at large.
\nQuestions:
\nThemes:
\nQuotes:
\n“We don’t fall for false news just because we’re dumb. Often it’s a matter of letting the wrong impulses take over.”
\nThis quote highlights the importance of both students and instructors to remain humble in approaching information on the Internet, and apply scrutiny instead of assuming immunity to misinformation. Students being aware of their own biases and mental shortcuts can also make them more effective historians as they are better equipped to weed out fact from propaganda or commentary.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nOverall analysis:
\nStudents and instructors of history can become better historians and citizens by being more aware of their own cognitive biases while sharing and interpreting information online. In a world where mental shortcuts and a speedy digital domain are the norm, slowing down and applying critical thought can help people arrive at better founded conclusions about history and beyond.
\nEleanor
\nSummary:
\nKassandra Granata breaks down the argument of another teacher, Robert Sterner, who believes that banning cell phones in the classroom is counterproductive.
\n**Main Argument:**
\nCell phones are useful tools and teachers can use them to share larger lessons about proper use of cell phones and the dangers of your digital footprint.
\n**Questions:**
\nThe reading emphasizes to using cell phones briefly during research. Why was this included?\nHow do you balance technology in your lesson plans between engagement or distraction?
**Themes:**
\nIt’s important to inform students about data mining and their digital footprint.\nCell phones can be utilized in the classroom for photo journalism or poetry analysis.\nAssignments involving cell phone use include social media like asking students to tweet from a historical figure’s point of view.\n**Quotes:**
\n“If I ban cell phones outright, I can’t have this conversation about what the future may hold for my students.”
\nThis quote speaks to me because we haven’t fully explored the idea in class. The conclusion of this week’s topic was to foster engagement above all else to make students motivated to use technology responsibly. I do think it’s important to explain to students the dangers of internet use. However, I would argue that teachers should explore social consequences of improper internet use, like cyberbullying or sending inappropriate pictures, or doxxing.
\n**Points worth considering:**
\nLessons should be engaging enough that students don’t desire to whip out their phones in the classroom.\nTeachers need to adapt their teaching methods to the influx and availability of technology and new media.\n**Overall analysis:** \\[Explain your final analysis of this reading - explain its value\\]
\nOverall, I wish this article was more detailed in terms of providing lesson plans and strategies to promote engagement. However, as a quick opinion piece, the author is succinct in explaining the potential for cell phone use. The introduction is engaging, validating the concerns of frustrated teachers. I also thought the inclusion of data mining was a good point we have not explored in class yet. This perspective can only broaden the mindset of educators, which is necessary for adapting to modernity.
\nDrew Pate
\nSummary:
\nMany educators debate whether smartphones should be banned in classrooms. Educator Robert Sterner shares much of the frustration of his colleagues regarding students’ distraction, but has adopted a more flexible approach based on 2 reasons he believes enrich the classroom experience.
\nMain Argument:
\nBanning smartphones in the classroom is often considered a no-brainer, but Sterner believes they have a very real purpose. For one, he would like to discuss the proper use of smartphones to maximize the chances of future employment and prevent employers from finding social media posts which could cast them in a negative light. Second, he believes smartphones can be powerful classroom tools. He gives several examples of their utility, including using Twitter to explore the perspective of literary characters.
\nQuestions:
\nThemes:
\nQuotes:
\nPoints worth considering:
\nOverall analysis:
\nI am overall unsure about whether not banning smartphones is a wise choice, as mine has significantly distracted me from learning course material in the past. However, Sterner has given me more perspective on the subject, and I think that future educators will need to adapt to the times and how students interact with technology.
\nAlex Clay
\nSummary:
\nThis article describes key benefits that Sterner believes not banning cellphones would add; Having conversations about proper cell phone use, utilizing the powerful tools that they are.
\nMain Argument:
\nThe author argues that not banning cellphones has more benefits than banning them.
\nQuestions:
\nWhat are the harms in allowing cell phone usage?\nHow can we effectively integrate phones into learning?\nThemes:
\nTechnology in the classroom.
\nEthically using Technology.
\nQuotes:
\n“Remember everything about that cell phone in your student’s pocket is vastly more powerful than the computer used by Neil Armstrong to land on the Moon.\"
\nThis quote highlights the massive advancements in technology that humanity has made in recent centuries. Keep in mind that the industrial revolution began a little over 150 years ago. Technology and progress has marched on at a breakneck pace and the world is changing each and every year. We must ensure that we are able to adapt to this progress.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nThere are several advantages to allowing and even encouraging cell phone use in class.\nIt’s less that cell phones are bad, more the way that students may use them.\nOverall analysis: This is a useful article as it articulates the idea that cell phone use in class is not absolutely negative, and that there are several advantages to doing so. Especially useful considering the normally negative stigma surround cell phones in regards to cla
\nGrace Stewart
\nSummary:
\nIf teachers ban cell phones, they would miss out on opportunities to learn. They are especially dangerous because of the digital footprint left behind, which can be tracked by future employers during background checks. If not used correctly, students could inadvertently damage their opportunities to get a career.
\nMain Argument:
\nRather than outright banning cellphones, they should be used to teach students and advance their education.
\nQuestions:
\nCould laptops erase the need for using mobile devices? Why or why not?\nHow would instructors ensure students arent using their phones to cheat or distract from the lesson?\nThemes:
\nPhones can be used for far more than just classroom distractions. Digital footprints are permanent, and without teaching proper safety, children’s online actions, words, or other mediums used in data mining, could stick with them for the rest of their lives.
\nQuotes:
\n“Employers are increasingly using data mining for background checks\"
\nThis spoke to me because I had never even heard of this. This is extremely interesting, as data mining could be used in a number of different ways, and not all of them are malicious.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nPhones can be used for poetry analysis, thesauruses, dictionaries, research, aid character analysis, and photojournalism. \nCell phones are more powerful than the computer used to bring Neil Armstrong to the moon. \nThose with such a power must be educated on how to use it properly, where it won’t hinder them later on in life.\nOverall analysis: [Explain your final analysis of this reading - explain its value]
\nCody Johnson
\nSummary:
\nThis reading was about a teacher who considered banning cellphones from the classroom as something she disagreed with. She says that she considered it but instead started to use them with her students in the classroom for some activities.
\nMain Argument:
\nThe Main argument is that banning cellphones is wrong as they can be used right in a classroom setting and be a powerful tool.
\nQuestions:
\nDoes having the students use the cellphone in class make them more or less likely to be doing what they aren’t supposed to. \nShould students do these activities on the phone when some could be done without. \nThemes:
\nHow to use the phone in class
\nDigital responsibility
\nTechnology is ok to use
\nQuotes:
\n\"Remember everything about that cell phone in your student’s pocket is vastly more powerful than the computer used by Neil Armstrong to land on the Moon,\" he wrote. \"Take advantage of that power!\"
\nI think this stands out as it is truly something to think that the little square i carry all day and mainly use to listen to music and text is more powerful than what was once used to bring people into outerspace. Phones are powerful and i think teaching students responsibility with the phone is a good thing
\nPoints worth considering:
\nUsing phones in the classroom can be a helpful way to deal with the phone problem and enhance student learning
\nOverall analysis:
\nI think this is a good read as it is often the other side of the argument (no phones) that gets so much attention and i think it is a good thing to highlight when a teacher does something that goes against the norm if it works well as it can open up a whole new way of interacting with the cellphone in class
\nMaddie Haas
\nSummary:
\nIn this article the author, James M. Lang, is discussing experiences with phones and other distractions in the classroom. From personal experiences, to research surrounding why students are distracted in the classroom.
\nmain Argument:
\nCellphones and other distractions are not the issue of separating students from the material, setting better learning goals are.
\nQuestions:
\nThemes:
\nQuotes:
\n\"They argue that distraction actually arises from a conflict between two fundamental features of our brain: our ability to create and plan high-level goals versus our ability to control our minds and environment as we take steps to complete those goals.\"
\nPoints worth considering:
\nCellphones are not the overall issue in the classroom, it's making the step to connect the teacher to the student.
\nNot all goals are created equal:
\nOverall Analysis:
\nIn total, this article was interesting and well thought out for its purpose of de-vilifying the cellphone within the classroom setting. Lang makes a good argument as to why we need to focus less on lecturing students against distraction usage and more inward thought as to what reasons students have to want to be distracted in the classroom. Lang presents great options for furthering the classroom purpose by establishing goals or reviewing previous goals.
\nBrodie Roeder
\nSummary:
In this text, Sarah M. Spalding explores how the popular TV show Game of Thrones can be used as a tool for teaching history. She argues that by engaging students with elements from the show, educators can spark interest in historical events, while also critically analyzing the ways in which history is often presented and interpreted.
Main Argument:
Spalding’s main argument is that Game of Thrones offers a unique opportunity to engage students with historical concepts and debates, allowing them to critically examine the intersections between popular culture and history.
Questions:
\nThemes:
\nQuotes:
“By engaging with popular culture, students not only learn about the past, but also about the ways in which history is constructed and contested in the present.”
Points worth considering:
\nOverall analysis:
Overall, Spalding’s article is an insightful exploration of how media, particularly Game of Thrones, can serve as a gateway for teaching history in a more engaging and critically reflective manner. The value of this reading lies in its innovative approach to teaching, encouraging educators to think beyond traditional methods and incorporate media to stimulate deeper analysis and discussion. It challenges the notion that entertainment and education must be separate, suggesting that the former can be a powerful tool in the history classroom.
Brodie Roeder
\nSummary:
In this article, James M. Lang discusses how modern technology, such as smartphones and laptops, contributes to students' inability to focus during classes, and how this distraction impacts learning. He explores various strategies for minimizing distractions in educational settings.
Main Argument:
Lang argues that technology-driven distractions in the classroom are a significant challenge to learning and proposes methods like adjusting teaching strategies and encouraging more active, engaged learning to combat this issue.
Questions:
\nThemes:
\nQuotes:
“Students who report using their devices during class for non-academic purposes are also the students who report lower grades.”
Points worth considering:
\nOverall analysis:
Overall, Lang’s article provides a compelling examination of the challenges posed by digital distractions in classrooms. Its value lies in its practical approach to addressing these challenges, offering solutions that empower educators to combat distractions without resorting to overly strict measures. The focus on active learning as a solution is particularly valuable for those interested in enhancing student engagement while recognizing the inevitable presence of technology in modern education.
Alex Clay
\nSummary:
\nThis article describes how the State University of New York (SUNY) has added education in AI to its core competency list, and how professors are reacting to this.
\nMain Argument:
\nProfessors will have to modify their courses to include education about AI.
\nQuestions:
\nWhat is the education about AI replacing in the curriculum?\nWhat are some methods to ensure students use AI ethically?\nThemes:
\nAI is not inherently bad or good, it is a tool to be used.
\nAI is here to stay and we must adapt to it.
\nQuotes:
\n“It’s really about recognizing AI as one potential source of information and really ensuring that students know how to treat that source of information responsibly\"
\nThis quote highlights why teaching about AI is important, it has its uses, but it must be used ethically and responsibly.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nMuch like other innovations such as the internet, AI is representative of the march of progress and we must ensure we keep up with it and adapt.\nAI represents just another reason why we must ensure our students have critical thinking skills.\nOverall analysis: This article is useful as it represents how universities are trying to adapt to the advent of AI. not cracking down on it, but instead embracing it as another tool to be used for learning and education. Yet this article also does not go into much detail regarding the flaws of AI compared to the benefits, this is a nuanced discussion that the article simply does not have.
\nDrew Pate
\nSummary
\nThe article explores copyright law and fair use at it relates to the classroom. It begins by describing the rights of authors of copyrighted works to exclusively make copies, produce derivative works, publicly distribute, display, and perform the work. However, it also discusses the concept of fair use, or the rights the public has in relation to the work. It contends that what constitutes fair use is often highly subjective and depends on a judge's opinion. Nevertheless, it gives four parameters that are wise to keep in mind when considering the potential legality of using a copyrighted work, and lists practices that would generally be considered safe. Specifically in the context of education, it points out that there is no universal limit for how much you can quote from a creative work in your own work, and suggested limits not guaranteed to be legal safe zones. Breaking DRM is illegal in general regardless of the intended use of that work.
\nMain Argument
\nThere are various factors to consider when utilizing a copyrighted work in your own lesson, and one should be generally aware of the copyright law and fair use to avoid legal issues.
\nQuestions
\nWhat are some examples of when reproducing an entire work would constitute fair use?
\nWhy is copyright law so subjective and nebulous?
\nHow does US copyright law compare to other countries'?
\nThemes
\nLegality
\nEthics
\nThe rights of authors and educators
\nQuotes
\n\"With this short set of rights, you would have near perfect control over your works, in fact, too perfect a control over your works. So, the law provides some breathing room so that the public can benefit from the increased numbers of works, which after all is the goal of the law.\"
\n\"While there are a few well defined use cases in which the use of copyrighted material is definitely legal or definitely illegal in the US, there is a large gulf of practices that fall somewhere in between.\"
\nPoints worth considering
\nOverall Analysis
\nOverall, this article was an informative and relatively comprehensive look into how educators can navigate the complex world of copyright law. Though it seems like there is a lot to consider, it seems that there are some common sense guidelines like ensuring your work is transformative and not detracting from the original work that are self-explanatory. Ultimately, the matter is up to the best judgment of the individual educator to avoid legal issues while still incorporating copyrighted material into their lessons.
\nMadeline Ward
\nSummary:
\nThis article by Johanna Alonso states the State University of New York's intention to implement lessons on AI use into its general education curriculum by Fall 2026, while also including several historians and educators' perspectives on the subject. Some commentators welcome the university's decision, while others warn that it may do more harm to students than good.
\nMain Argument:
\nAlonso argues that SUNY's curriculum adjustment is bound to vary significantly across the many campuses and departments that will add AI education into its requirements, and may struggle to address artificial intelligence in an appropriate manner.
\nQuestions:
\nThemes:
\n• Ethics of using artificial intelligence
• Reliability of artificial intelligence
• Media literacy
Quotes:
\n\"Some choose the AI writing, saying it’s more well-written, polished and professional-sounding than the other options.\"
\nOne of the other readings this week (which was published several years ago) argued that humans will always end up preferring \"real\" writing as opposed to AI-produced writing, which lacks human emotion. The fact is, AI is learning so fast and has already reached the stage in which many people may prefer its practical and creative content over human-produced art and writing (it is certainly cheaper). This will become increasingly more true and one of the most frightening aspects of artificial intelligence, I think.
\nPoints worth considering:
\nOverall analysis: As someone quite skeptical of Artificial Intelligence (and more so the ethical justification of its use), I found SUNY's description of its plans, and many of the article's included academic responses, lacking. It's very true that Artificial Intelligence is an inevitable force on which students must be educated, and outright bans aren't always effective, but I'm not convinced that the AI has any place in serious education whatsoever.
\nThat being said, Alonso's article itself provides a decent summary and example of what one university system is aiming to do in response to this new technology, as well as what various commentators feel about it.
\nJoe Bolick
\nSummary:
\nThis is an informative article written by Johanna Alonso, informing readers that the State University of New York will be implementing instruction that educates students on AI and the ethics behind it, within the information literacy core program classes. The article looks at the differing views of this decision and the debates on the pros and cons of this experiment.
\nMain Argument:
\nThe curriculum and layout of every class within a field that takes on the implementation of AI instruction will have to be adjusted.
\nQuestions:
\nSince universities are already having trouble being able to tell if student are doing there own work or using AI, would teaching them how to better use AI not make this worse?
\nIf professor that teach information literacy core classes are made to implement AI education, what are they removing from their curriculum?
\nThemes:
\nStudents learning how to use AI in an ethical manner is important.
\nAI is not going away, therefore we need to learn how to use it.
\nQuotes:
\n\"'We are proud that … we will help or students recognize and ethically use AI as they consider various information sources'\"
\nI think this statement made by SUNY speaks to the heart of the article. The article is informative of the decision that SUNY made and this is the university supporting its decision. The rest of the article plays off this decision and statement.
\nPoints worth considering:
\n\"'I think it's important to teach them this is not going anywhere, and I think it's a technology that we have to learn how to use-and learn how to use effectively,\" About halfway down.
\nWhen there are high schoolers that struggle to complete the basic media literacy task like understanding the difference between a news article and an advertisement, then when they move on to college level studies of AI and media literacy they will be doomed. About 3/4ths of the way down.
\nOverall Analysis:
\nRespectfully, I did not really like this piece. I felt like it tried to show pros and cons of AI education being implemented into general educational courses at the college level but it leaned very much more to the side supporting its implementation. I am not a supporter of AI either and I felt that if anything this article helped give me more reasons to not like AI.
\nBrodie Roeder
\nSummary
\nIn this blog post, we are given a general overview of what copyright and fair use laws are, and how they can be used and impact certain educational aspects. The author takes us through the legal processes of copyright, such as what it is and how it comes into effect, as well as fair use, which are the rules surrounding what knowledge and information can be classified as public or private.
\nMain Argument
\nGaining access to certain information may seem daunting, but if you understand copyright and fair use laws, it is fairly simple to determine what can and can not be used in an instructional manner.
\nQuestions
\nDo different combinations of the different parameters listed under the fair use section lead to different legal outcomes?
\nThemes
\nKnowing what copyright is
\nHow fair use laws can impact instruction
\nQuotes
\n\"The Copyright Act gives all authors a set of rights that only they may exercise. These include the right to make copies, to prepare derivative works, to publicly distribute, display and perform the work, and in the case of digital sound recordings, to perform the works over a digital network.\"
\nPoints worth considering
\nModern laws surrounding copyright, fair use, and the internet have generally made it easier to both collect and safeguard information
\nKnowing how these laws work can also allow one to protect his or her own knowledge
\nOverall Analysis
\nOverall, I found this article to be an interesting look into what the process of making public and privatizing online information looks like, and how educators can navigate these fields in order to better incorporate certain knowledge into their own teachings.
\nOliver Roth
\nSummary
\nSarah Bond, is a professor at the university of Iowa who among other things teaches a course on Roman history, however they have come to the conclusion that AI is making their ability to effectively assess students more of a challenge. Bond found that students were actively using AI in their classroom, and rather than ban it, they decided to show students the faults with AI in their discipline.
\nMain Argument
\nBond uses the film Gladiator to illustrate how AI fails at connecting certain types of information with a given prompt. Namely this is shown by asking Chat GPT to explain the inaccuracies of the film, which in response gave a long winded “hallucinogenic” mess of an answer. They also showcase how AI lacks the ability to show any humanity in their answers, instead generative models like Chat GPT give cold and rigid responses.
\nQuestions
\nGenerative Machine Learning companies continue to hire academics and experts in specific fields to feed information and advise programers on how to be more accurate for any prompt. What is holding these companies from developing the ability to sound more sincere in their responses?
\nDo educators need to have a unit early in their courses on using AI in their classrooms? I have had multiple classes, showing how GPT is completely incorrect in answering essay questions from courses in our department.
\nThemes
\nGenerative Machine Learning
\nThe “human element” of life
\nQuotes
\n“In response, art and humanities teachers have increasingly moved to ban their use in assignments. And yet, from books to alcohol to sex, sociologists largely agree that bans are socially ineffective.”
\n“In the face of uncertainty, AI tends to “hallucinate” and make facts and people up with the confidence of a mediocre White man.”
\n\nPoints worth considering
\nEarlier in the semester in class we talked about who we think are popular historians, I remember Dr. Sibaja mentioned Ridley Scott. I know originally there was some distaste for that claim, but there is something this article opens with that academics can not dictate how people get information. People are turning to generative machine learning as an alternative to even googling or wikipedia. How correct information is can be substantially less important than how accessible it is to access for the average person.
\nI do wonder if we are at a time where a new Turing test will need to be conceived. Originally the rule was if an AI/Machine learning algorithm could consistently fool humans that it was not an AI, then it has achieved some level of sentience. However, as Bond and others point out, AI today lacks the ability to be creative in its own right. I think there is a time quickly approaching where the new test will be if AI can start to create and expand on its own unprompted. What that means for academics will be interesting, the sentiment that “we don't know what we don't know” doesn't really apply to machine learning which actively is aware of what it does not currently possess.
\nOverall analysis
\nWe are living in a time period where there is not a guide for what we can expect. Even in the world of Science Fiction, our current programs are in no way true AI, but massive generative models. However, we are starting to see some of the damages that this system can cause notably in the world of academia. I agree with Bond that our “AI” fails at large aspects of our discipline, but I truly don’t think the average “consumer” cares. Even within our discipline the default when needing a question answered quickly is not to reference the most scholarly written sources, but to prompt our question into google and take the first result.
\nMaddie Haas
\nSummary
\nIn this article the author, Kris Shaffer, provides information about copyright of materials aimed at informing instructors and teachers on what they can and can not use in a classroom, which steps need to be taken to be granted access to items, and overall methods of source citing.
\nMain Argument
\nUnderstanding fair use laws is not as difficult as it seems, and you do not need to be in a law field to understand how to use them to gain access to information.
\nQuestions
\nThough the article tells us what we can do with fair use, what are the definite things we cannot do with fair use policy?
\nThemes
\nUnderstanding copyrights
\nteaching teachers
\nSafe practice online
\nQuotes
\n\"A creators rights persist for their entire lifetime, plus 70 more years. After that, works become part of the public domain, and anyone can use them for any purpose, without attribution or paying royalties.\"
\nPoints worth considering
\nbecause of fair use and copyright laws we have made the internet a more reliable place for the protection of theft of ideas or works.
\nOverall Analysis
\nThis article highlighted what important aspects it needed without the use of too many words. To combat this, Shaffer ads numerous links to more information if the reader would like to learn more without feeling like they must weed through this article. Everything was clean and defined, regardless of the authors lack of law education.
\n