This new paper from DER member Prof Michael Henderson reveals new insights into the factors that influence the tempation to cheat in large scale digital exams.

Discussions around assessment integrity often focus on the exam conditions and the motivations and values of those who cheated in comparison with those who did not. We argue that discourse needs to move away from a binary representation of cheating. Instead, we propose that the conversation may be more productive and more impactful by focusing on those who do not cheat, but who are tempted to do so. We conceptualise this group as being at risk of future cheating behaviour and potentially more receptive of targeted strategies to support their integrity decisions. In this paper we report on a large-scale survey of university students (n = 7,511) who had just completed one or more end of semester online exams. In doing so we explore students’ reported temptation to cheat. Analysis surrounding this “at risk” group reveals students who were Tempted (n = 1379) had significant differences from those who Cheated (n = 216) as well as those who were Not tempted (n = 5916). We focus on four research questions exploring whether there are specific online exam conditions, security settings, student attitudes or perceptions which are more strongly associated with the temptation to cheat. The paper offers insights to help institutions to minimise factors that might lead to breaches of assessment integrity, by focusing on the temptation to cheat during assessment.

Access the article here!

Citation: Henderson, M., Chung, J., Awdry, R. et al. The temptation to cheat in online exams: moving beyond the binary discourse of cheating and not cheating. International Journal of Educational Integrity 19, 21 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00143-2

This new article by DER member Prof Michael Henderson reveals some of the productive as well as challenging practices surrounding PhD supervision feedback.

PhD candidates, like all students, learn through engaging with feedback. However, there is limited understanding of how feedback strategies support doctoral candidates. This qualitative framework synthesis of 86 papers analysed rich qualitative data about feedback within PhD supervision. Our synthesis, informed by sociomateriality and a dialogic, sense-making view of feedback, underscores the critical role that feedback plays in doctoral supervision. Supervisors, through their engagement or disengagement with feedback, controlled candidates’ access to tacit and explicit standards. The ephemeral and generative nature of verbal feedback dialogues contrasted with concrete textual comments. While many supervisors aimed for candidates to become less reliant on feedback over time, this did not necessarily translate to practice. Our findings suggest that balancing power dynamics might be achieved through focussing on feedback materials and practices rather than supervisor-candidate relationships.

Access the article here!

Citation: Bearman,M., Joanna, T., Henderson, M., Esterhazy, R., Mahoney, P., & Molloy, E. (2024). Enhancing feedback practices within PhD supervision: a qualitative framework synthesis of the literature. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2024.2307332

Tim Fawns is Associate Professor (Education-Focused) in the Monash Education Academy, part of Learning and Teaching within the Portfolio of the Deputy Vice Chancellor Education. His role involves contributing to the development of initiatives and resources that help educators across Monash to improve their knowledge and practice, and to be recognised for that improvement and effort. Tim’s research interests are at the intersection between digital, professional and higher education, with a particular focus on the relationship between technology and educational practice.

Publications

Journal articles

• Fawns, T., &  Schuwirth, L. (2023). Rethinking the value proposition of assessment at a time of rapid development in generative artificial intelligence. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15259.
• Fawns, T., Ross, J., Carbonel, H., Noteboom, J., Finnegan-Dehn, S., & Raver, M. (2023). Mapping and tracing the postdigital: Approaches and parameters of postdigital research. Postdigital Science and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-023-00391-y.
• Markauskaite, L., Carvalho, L. & Fawns, T. (2023). The role of teachers in a sustainable university: from digital competencies to postdigital capabilities. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71, 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10199-z.
• Fawns, T. (2023). Cued recall : Using photo-elicitation to examine the distributed processes of remembering with photographs. Memory Studies, 16(2), 264–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698021107.
• Fawns, T. (2022). An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy—Technology Dichotomy. Postdigital Science and Education, 4(3), 711–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-022-00302-7.
• Fawns, T. (2022). Remembering in the wild : recontextualising and reconciling studies of media and memory. Memory, Mind & Media, 1, E11. https://doi.org/10.1017/mem.2022.5.
• Aitken, G., Fawns, T., Warran, K., & Jones, D. (2022). Making space to learn about teaching: expanding teaching horizons through postgraduate education. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 28, 327–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-022-10144-4.
• Fawns, T., & Schaepkens, S. (2022). A Matter of Trust: Online Proctored Exams and the Integration of Technologies of Assessment in Medical Education. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 34(4), 444-453. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2022.2048832.
• Fawns, T., Mulherin, T., Hounsell, D., & Aitken, G. (2021). Seamful learning and professional education. Studies in Continuing Education, 43(3), 360-376
  https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0158037X.2021.1920383
• Fawns, T., Aitken, G., Jones, D., & Gravett, K. (2021). Beyond Technology in Online Postgraduate Education. Postdigital Science and Education, 4, 557–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00277-x
• Fawns, T., Aitken, G. & Jones, D. (2021). Ecological teaching evaluation vs the datafication of quality: Understanding education with, and around, data. Postdigital Science and Education, 3, 65–82.
• Gulasaryan, A., Aitken, G., Fawns, T., Jones, D., Napier, J., & Walker, K. (2021). How can inhabited institutionalism inform the analysis of medical education? Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14587.
• Hennus, M. P., Nusmeier, A., van Heesch, G. G. M., Riedijk, M. A., Schoenmaker, N. J., Soeteman, M., Wildschut, E. D., Fawns, T., & Cate, O. Ten. (2021). Development of entrustable professional activities for paediatric intensive care fellows: A national modified Delphi study. PLoS ONE, 16(3 March), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248565.
• Aitken, G., Smith, K., Fawns, T., Jones, D. (2020). Participatory alignment: a positive relationship between educators and students during online masters dissertation supervision. Teaching in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1744129.
• Fawns, T., Jones, D., & Aitken, G. (2020). Challenging assumptions about “moving online” in response to covid-19 , and some practical advice. MedEdPublish, 9(1), 83. https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2020.000083.1.
• Jones, D., Fawns, T., & Aitken, G. (2020). Using a theoretical framework to develop postgraduate health professions education research and practice. MedEdPublish, 9(1): 78. https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2020.000078.1.
• Fawns, T., Aitken, G. & Jones, D. (2019). Online learning as embodied, socially meaningful experience. Postdigital Science and Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-019-00048-9.
• Fawns, T. (2019). Postdigital education in design and practice.  Postdigital Science and Education, 1: 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-018-0021-8
• Fawns, T. (2019). Blended memory: A framework for understanding distributed autobiographical remembering with photography. Memory Studies.https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698019829891.  
• Aitken, G., Jones, D., Fawns, T. et al. (2019). Using Bourdieu to explore graduate attributes in two online Master’s programmes. Advances in Health Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-019-09885-6.
• Fawns, T. & O’Shea, C. (2019). Evaluative judgement of working practices: Reconfiguring assessment to support student adaptability and agency across complex settings. Italian Journal of Educational Technology. 27 (1)
• Moeller, J. J. & Fawns, T. (2018). IInsights into teaching a complex skill: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge in electroencephalography (EEG). Medical Teacher,40(4), 387–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2017.1408902.
• Fawns, T., Bayne, S., Ross, J., Nicol, S., Quayle, E., Macleod, H. & Howie, K. (2015). Socially reconstructing history: The Social History Timestream application. Continuum, 29(4), pp. 522-533. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2015.1051802.
• Fawns, T. (2015). Lessons from personal photography: the digital disruption of selectivity and reflection. Techtrends59, pp. 50-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0820-z.
• Fawns, T. (2014). Photography and the disruption of memory and meaning. Ubiquity 3(1-2), pp. 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1386/ubiq.3.1-2.3_1
• O’Shea, C. & Fawns, T. (2014). Group connoisseurship: creating shared understandings of quality in online collaborative assessments. Brookes eJournal of Learning and Teaching, 6(2). 
• McKenzie, K., Cossar, J., Fawns, T. & Murray, A. L. (2012). Reconciling the professional and student identities of Clinical Psychology Trainees. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 18, pp. 745-754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-012-9412-x
• McKenzie, K. & Fawns, T. (2011). Social networking, identity and professionalism in clinical psychology. Clinical Psychology Forum.
• Fawns, T. McKenzie, K. (2010). Using e-portfolios to enhance students’ learning. Nursing Times, 106. 
• Fawns, T. & McKenzie, K. (2009). Facilitating online discussion, tutoring and moderating skills in clinical psychology lecturers. Clinical Psychology Forum.

Edited books

• Fawns, T., Aitken, G., Jones, D. (Eds.) (2021). Online Postgraduate Education in a Postdigital World.: Beyond Technology. Cham: Springer.
• Fawns, T.(Ed.). (2013). Memory and Meaning: Digital Differences. Oxford: Inter-Disciplinary Press.

Book chapters

• Fawns, T., & Nieminem, J. (2023). The only way is ethics: A dialogue of assessment and social good. In L. Czerniewicz & C. Cronin (Eds.), Higher Education for Good: Teaching and Learning Futures (pp. 533-553). Open Book Publishers.
• Fawns, T., Aitken, G., Maheswaran, Y., & Yasotharan, K. (2023). Expanding the Pedagogical Space: Co-design and Participation in an Online Postgraduate Course. In A. Weich & F. Macgilchrist (Eds.), Postdigital Participation in Education (pp. 125–147). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38052-5_7
• Fawns, T., Markauskaite, L., Carvalho, L., & Goodyear, P. (2022). H2m pedagogy: Designing for hybrid learning in medical education. In E. Gil, Y. Mor, Y. Dimitriadis, & C. Köppe (Eds.), Hybrid Learning Spaces. Berlin: Springer.
• Fawns, T., Aitken, G., and Jones, D. (2021). Introduction: A Postdigital Position on Online Postgraduate Education. In T. Fawns, G. Aitken, & D. Jones (Eds.), Online Postgraduate Education in a Postdigital World: Beyond Technology (pp. xv-xxvi). Cham: Springer.
• Fawns, T., Aitken, G., and Jones, D. (2021). A Little More Conversation, A Little Less Factionalisation: Thoughts for The Postdigital Future of Online Postgraduate Education. In T. Fawns, G. Aitken, & D. Jones (Eds.), Online Postgraduate Education in a Postdigital World: Beyond Technology (pp. 217–232). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77673-2_12.
• Fawns, T., and Sinclair, C. (2021). Towards Ecological Evaluation of Online Courses: Aiming for Thick Description. In T. Fawns, G. Aitken, & D. Jones (Eds.), Online Postgraduate Education in a Postdigital World: Beyond Technology (pp. 85–104). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77673-2_5.
• Fawns, T., Gallagher, M., and Bayne, S. (2021d). Institutional Contexts in Supporting Quality Online Postgraduate Education: Lessons Learned from Two Initiatives at The University of Edinburgh. In T. Fawns, G. Aitken, & D. Jones (Eds.), Online Postgraduate Education in a Postdigital World: Beyond Technology (pp. 197–216). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77673-2_11.
• Fawns, T. (2020). The photo-elicitation interview as a multimodal site for reflexivity. In Visual Methods in Psychology (Second Edition), pp. 487–501. Reavey, P. (Ed.). Routledge.
• O’Shea, C. and Fawns, T. (2014). Disruptions and Dialogues: Supporting Collaborative Connoisseurship in Digital Environments. In Advances and Innovations in University Assessment and Feedback: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Dai Hounsell. Kreber, C., Anderson, C., Entwistle, N. & McArthur, J. (Eds.). EdinburghUniversity Press, pp. 259-273.
• Fawns, T. (2013). Blended Memory: the Changing Balance of Technologically-mediated Semantic and Episodic Memory. In Memory and Meaning: Digital Differences. Fawns (Ed.) Inter-Disciplinary Press, pp. 75-98.
• Fawns, T. (2013). Introduction: Finding Digital Memory. In Memory and Meaning: Digital Differences. Fawns (Ed.) Inter-Disciplinary Press.

eBook chapters

• Fawns, T., Macleod, H., and Quayle, E. (2012). Social and technological influences on engagement with personal memory objects: a media roles perspective. Remembering Digitally. Inter-Disciplinary Press. Available at http://www.interdisciplinarypress.net/online-store/ebooks/digital-humanities/remembering-digitally
• Fawns, T. (2012). Blended Memory: the Changing Balance of Technologically-mediated Semantic and Episodic Memory. Navigating Landscapes of Mediated Memory. Inter-Disciplinary Press. Available at: http://www.interdisciplinarypress.net/online-store/ebooks/digital-humanities/navigating-landscapes-of-mediated-memory

Conference proceedings

• Fawns, T. & O’Shea, C. (2018). Distributed Learning and Isolated Testing: Tensions in Traditional Assessment Practices. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Networked Learning 2018. Bajić, M., Dohn, N. B., de Laat, M., Jandrić, P. & Ryberg, T. (eds.). pp. 132-139.
• O’Shea, C. and Fawns, T. (2014).A new conceptual frame for group work: group connoisseurship. The Open and Flexible Higher Education Conference. EADTU, Krakow, Poland. 23-24 October, 2014. pp.287-304.

Filia Garivaldis is a behavioural scientist and a Senior Lecturer at the Monash Sustainable Development Institute (MSDI). Her work is focused on assisting expert educators apply behavioural insights into their education programs, to improve a range of teaching and learning outcomes, in online as well as face to face modalities.

Since joining MSDI in 2019, Filia has been leading the development of new behaviour change education programs with BehaviourWorks Australia since 2019, applying her online education expertise to create impactful and engaging opportunities for teaching and learning. Programs include one of the University’s first micro-credential programs, “Applying Behavioural Science to Create Change”, nominated multiple times for a Vice-Chancellor’s Award for Industry and Community Education Programs, a series of behaviour change skills courses, and a MOOC in collaboration with the United Nation’s SDG Academy.

The innovations in teaching and learning that she has introduced have been replicated across multiple other programs offered by MSDI, such as the Institute’s Sustainable Healthcare Micro-credential, and have led to education collaborations with other Institutes and Faculties, such as the Monash University Accident Research Centre and the Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences.

Filia has been involved in funded projects over the years, dedicated to advancing education in the online mode. Specifically, she lead an Inter-Faculty Transformation Project funded by the Monash Education Academy, to create Monash’s first university-wide orientation resource for all online students of the university (2019), has received a Dean’s Award for Technological Innovation in Learning and Teaching for the development of the Psychology Research Portal (2019), and shortlisted twice for a Business in Higher Education Round Table (BHERT) award for Outstanding Collaboration in Higher Education and Training, and specifically for Expanding and Improving 4th Year Psychology Education in Australia (2018 & 2019).

She has published widely in this area in leading peer-review journals and books. In 2022 she led the publication of a Special Issue on online education for the Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, with an international team of experts from the United States and the United Kingdom. Filia is also a co-editor on a joint Monash University-King’s College London textbook, titled “Tertiary Online Teaching and Learning: TOTAL Digital Education Perspectives and Resources”, published internationally by Springer–Verlag in 2020.

Books:

McKenzie, S. M., Garivaldis, F. J., & Dyer, K. (2020). Tertiary online teaching and learning: Total perspectives and resources for digital education. Singapore: Springer Nature.

Peer-review Journal Papers:

Garivaldis, F. J., McKenzie, S., Henriksen, D., & Studente, S. (2022). Special Issue Editorial: Achieving Lasting Education in the New Digital Learning World. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38 (4). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.8331

Garivaldis, F.J., Chung, J., Braganza, L., Arulkadacham, L., Sharma, R., Reupert, A., McKenzie, S., Rose, G., Gupta, T., Aziz, Z., Mowbray, T., Ilic, D., & Mundy, M. (2022). Out of sight, but not out of mind: A case study in the collaborative development of a university-wide orientation resource for online students. Educational Technology, Research, and Development, 70 (2), 531-558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10090-3

Arulkadacham, L., McKenzie, S., Aziz, Z., Chung, J., Dyer, K., Hold, C., Garivaldis, F., Mundy, M. (2021). General and unique predictors of student success in online courses: A systematic review and focus group. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 18 (8). https://doi.org/10.53761/1.18.8.7

Schweinsberg, A., Mundy, M. E., Dyer, K. R., & Garivaldis, F. (2021). Psychology education and work readiness integration: A call for research in Australia. Frontiers in Psychology, 12 (Article 623353). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.623353

Studente, S., Ellis, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2020). Exploring the potential of chatbots in higher education: a preliminary study. International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences 14, 9, 768 – 771.

Studente, S. & Seppala, N, & Garivaldis, F. J. (2019). Re-addressing the redundancy effect: A cognitive strategy for e-learning design, Journal of Psychological Research, 1 (2), 1-7.

Rodafinos, A., Garivaldis, F., & McKenzie, S. (2018). A fully online research portal for research students and researchers, Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 17, 163-178. https://doi.org/10.28945/4097

Roddy, C., Amiet, D., Chung, J., Holt, C., Shaw, L., McKenzie, S., Garivaldis, F., & Mundy, M. (2017). Applying best practice online learning, teaching and support to intensive online environments: An integrative review. Frontiers in Education.

McKenzie, S.P., Garivaldis, F. J., Kaissidis, A., & Mundy, M. (2016). Developing a transferable research portal – creating an on campus equivalent fully online research course component. EDULEARN16 Proceedings, pp. 877-882.

Studente, S., Garivaldis, F. & Seppala, N. (2016). Designing Multimedia Materials for Non- Native English Speaking Students: Challenging Visual-Verbal Classifications. Proceedings of the European Conference on Technology in the Classroom. Brighton

Galanakis, M., Moraitou, M., Stalikas, A., & Garivaldis, F. J. (2011). The relation of positive emotions on post-partum depression. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 6 (1), 112-142.

Moraitou, M., Galanakis, M., Lamai, E., Garivaldis, F. J., & Kalogianni, V. (2010). Post-partum depression in Cypriot new mothers, International Journal of Caring Sciences, 3 (2), 63-70.

Galanakis, M., Moraitou, M., Garivaldis, F.J., Stalikas, A. (2009). Factorial structure and psychometric properties of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) in Greek midwives. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 4, 52-70.

Galanakis, M., Moraitou, M., Garivaldis, F.J., Stalikas, A. (2009). Factorial structure and psychometric properties of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) in Greek midwives. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 4, 52-70.

Garivaldis, F.J., & Moss, S.A. (2007). The effect of familiar music on the perception of other individuals. Psychomusicology, 19 (2), 13-31. *This publication received a Publication Award from Monash Research Graduate School.

Moss, S., Garivaldis, F. J. & Toukhsati, S. R. (2007). The perceived similarity of other individuals: The contaminating effects of familiarity and neuroticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 43 (2), 401-412.

Book Chapters:

Studente, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2022). A preliminary analysis of the impacts of COVID-19 on the mental wellbeing of entrepreneur students. In Yousafzai, S, Ng, W, Coogan, T, Green, H & Sheikh, S (Eds.) Exploring the Intersectionality between Disability and Entrepreneurship. Edward Elgar; Cheltenham.

Desai, B., Studente, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2022). The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Consumer Purchasing Behaviour: Implications for  Digital Marketing in the Retail Sector. In Tabari, S & Chen, W (Eds.) Global Strategic Management in the Service Industry: A Perspective of the New Era. Emerald Publishing. https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/doi/10.1108/9781801170819  

Nestel, D., Syms, S., Garivaldis, F., & Nataraja, R. (2022). Online simulation-based education in healthcare: Moving beyond adaptation to mainstream. In S. McKenzie, L. Arulkadacham, J. Chung, & Z. Aziz (Eds.) The Future of Online Education. Nova Publishers. https://doi.org/10.52305/LERQ4827

McKenzie, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2022). The Future of Online Education: Transforming Great Challenges into Great Opportunities. In S. McKenzie, L. Arulkadacham, J. Chung, & Z. Aziz (Eds.) The Future of Online Education. Nova Publishers. https://doi.org/10.52305/LERQ4827 

Garivaldis, F. J., & Iqbal, M. (2022). Behaviour change during COVID-19. A matter of life and death? In D. Vakoch and S. Mikey (Eds.) Eco-Anxiety and Pandemic Distress Psychological Perspectives on Resilience and Interconnectedness (pp. 122-130). Oxford University

Curtis, J., Garivaldis, F. J , Tull, F., & Tear, M. (2021). ‘You are not normal!’ Understanding the influences on behaviour, Chapter 6. The Method Book. Monash University. https://doi.org/10.26180/14703789.v1Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197622674.001.0001

Garivaldis, F. J., Boulet, M., Yang, B., & Kneebone, S. (2021). Designing and Delivering Online Education: One Size Does Not Fit All. In S. Studente, S. Ellis, & B. Desai (Eds.) The impact of covid-19 on teaching and learning in higher education (pp. 77-94). Nova Science: New York.

Schweinsberg, A., & Garivaldis, F. (2020). “Ready or not, here i come-preparing online students for the real working world”. In S. McKenzie, F. Garivaldis, & K. Dyer (Eds.), Tertiary online teaching and learning: Total perspectives and resources for digital education. Springer Nature.

Studente, S., Ellis, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2020) The impact of chatbots to pedagogy and  student engagement: preliminary findings and lessons from a pilot. In R. Nata (Ed.) Progress in Education. Nova Science Publishers.

McKenzie, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2020). How can we Best Prepare for our Brave New Education World? Directions and Vehicles. In S. McKenzie, F. Garivaldis, & K.R. Dyer (Eds), Tertiary Online Teaching and Learning: TOTAL Perspectives and Resources for Digital Education. Springer, Singapore.

Garivaldis, F. J., McKenzie, S., & Mundy, M. (2020). E-learning: Development of a fully online 4th year psychology program. In D. Nestel, G. Reedy, L. McKenna, & S. Gough, Clinical Education for the Health Professions: Theory and Practice. Springer: Singapore.

Garivaldis, F. (2020). Transcending “Distance” in Distance Education. In S. McKenzie, F. Garivaldis, & K.R. Dyer (Eds), Tertiary Online Teaching and Learning: TOTAL Perspectives and Resources for Digital Education. Springer, Singapore.

McKenzie, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2020). Climbing Aboard the Online Research MO-PED: Fuelling Good Online Education Outcomes with Good Online Research Programs. In S. McKenzie, F. Garivaldis, & K.R. Dyer (Eds), Tertiary Online Teaching and Learning: TOTAL Perspectives and Resources for Digital Education. Springer, Singapore.

McKenzie, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2020). How can we Best Prepare for our Brave New Education World? Directions and Vehicles. In S. McKenzie, F. Garivaldis, & K.R. Dyer (Eds), Tertiary Online Teaching and Learning: TOTAL Perspectives and Resources for Digital Education. Springer, Singapore.

Rose, G., McKenzie, S., Holt, C., Garivaldis, F., & Mundy, M. (2020). Advancing Online Education Through a Community of Practice. In S. McKenzie, F. Garivaldis, & K.R. Dyer (Eds), Tertiary Online Teaching and Learning: TOTAL Perspectives and Resources for Digital Education. Springer, Singapore.

McKenzie, S., Azis, Z., Garivaldis, F., Mundy, M.  (2020).  An Online Research Portal – an Integrated and Transferable Fully Online Research System. In S. McKenzie, F. Garivaldis, & K.R. Dyer (Eds), Tertiary Online Teaching and Learning: TOTAL Perspectives and Resources for Digital Education. Springer, Singapore.

Sylvie, S., & Garivaldis, F. J. (2019). Facilitating and Motivating Students’ Verbal and Visual Creativity in Higher Education through Assessment Feedback. In R. L. Cuadra (Ed.), Understanding Creativity: Past, Present and Future Perspectives (pp. 79-111). Nova Science Publishers.

Conferences and Posters (last 5 years):

Garivaldis, F. & Bos, A. (2023). Exploring transformative learning: Drawing on the expertise and lived experiences of the transformation community. Transformations Conference. Sydney, July

Garivaldis, F. & Bedi, G. (2023). Engaging students with volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA): Insights and consideration on teaching social and emotional competencies from an exploratory case study in Australia. Applying Education in a Complex World. Toronto, April 26-28.

Garivaldis, F. Raj, K., & Kneebone, S. (2023). Perceptions of Ethics in Behaviour Change. 5th Annual BEST Conference on Human Behaviour & Decision Making 2023, Queensland University of Technology, 2-3 February, 2023.

Studente, S., Ellis, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2021). The use of chatbot technology for improving connectedness and learning support among international students during the COVID-19 Pandemic. The 19th Academic Practice and Technology Conference (APT). London

Studente, S., Ellis, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2020). Exploring the Potential of Chatbots in Higher Education: A Preliminary Study. International Conference on Advance Learning Technologies. Amsterdam

Studente, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2019). The effect of feedback and self-regulation on facilitating and motivating student’s verbal and visual creativity in assessments. The Creativity Conference. Southern Oregon University, USA.

Garivaldis, F. J., & Plant, B. (2018, June). Developing and Evaluating Work Readiness of Students in a Fully Online Careers in Psychology Course. The Learner Conference, Athens.

Studente, S. & Garivaldis, F. (2018, May). The Role of Self-Regulation and Assessment Feedback on Creative Performance. ICANCEM 2018: 20th International Conference on Applications of Neuropsychology, Cognition, Emotion, and Motivation (Waset), Rome.

Roddy, C., Chung, J., Amiet, D., McKenzie, S., Garivaldis, F., & Mundy, M. (2017, September). Assessing student readiness for online learning. Australian Psychology Learning and Teaching Conference (AusPLAT), Ipswich.

Amiet, D., Roddy, C., Chung, J., McKenzie, S., Garivaldis, F., & Mundy, M. (2017, September). Offering Innovative Wellbeing and Support Services for Online Students: A Case Study. Australian Psychology Leaning and Teaching Conference (AusPLAT), Ipswich.

Chung, J., Roddy, C., Amiet, D., McKenzie, S., Garivaldis, F., & Mundy, M. (2017, September). An Australian Innovation: Monash University’s Fully Online Honours Equivalent Psychology Course. Australian Psychology Leaning and Teaching Conference (AusPLAT), Ipswich.

Other media publications:

Garivaldis, F. (2022). The benefits of workplace simulation. UNLEASH. Available at: https://www.unleash.ai/skills-development/the-benefits-of-workplace-simulation/ 

Garivaldis, F., & Paine, G. (2022). Simulation stimulation: The business benefits of true-to-life role playing, Monash LENS, Available at: https://lens.monash.edu/2022/08/30/1384958/simulation-stimulation-the-business-benefits-of-true-to-life-role-playing

Garivaldis, F. J. & Kneebone, S. (2021). Three things we need to get right to ensure online professional development works, The Conversation, Available at: https://theconversation.com/3-things-we-need-to-get-right-to-ensure-online-professional-development-works-164785

Garivaldis. F. (2020). COVID-19: Emotional and behavioural reactions to the unexpected, Monash LENS, Available at: https://lens.monash.edu/@politics-society/2020/03/24/1379876/covid-19-emotional-and-behavioural-reactions-to-the-unexpected

2021-2022:

Inter-Faculty Seeding Grant, “Strengthening students’ resilience in the face of uncertainty”, in collaboration with the Faculty of Education ($10,000).

2018-2019:

Monash Education Academy Inter-Faculty Transformation Grant, Building an online education student orientation site: The Monash Online Learning Hub, 2018 – $74,866

New article in the Cambridge Journal of Education by DER members Luci Pangrazio, Neil Selwyn & Bronwyn Cumbo exploring student experiences of school datafication

ABSTRACT
The use of digital technologies within schools is leading to the increased generation, processing and circulation of data relating to students. To date, academic research around this ‘datafication’ of schools and schooling has tended to focus on institutional issues of governance and commercialisation, with relatively little consideration of students’ experiences. Drawing on focus group discussions with 62 students across three Australian secondary schools, the paper explores students’ experiences of school datafication in terms of power, surveillance and affect. It highlights students’ relatively constrained and distanced relations with school technology use, schools’ use of data to enforce student accountability and self-regulation of behaviour, as well students’ perceived powerlessness to engage agentically in digital practices. Drawing on notions of ‘digital resignation’ and ‘surveillance realism’, the paper concludes by considering the extent to which students might be supported to meaningfully engage with (and possibly resist) the constraining ‘atmospheres’ of datafication.
Luci Pangrazio, Neil Selwyn & Bronwyn Cumbo (2023) Tracking technology: exploring student experiences of school datafication, Cambridge Journal of Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2023.2215194

ASCILITE is the premier academic and practitioner conference in higher education digital technologies. This year was the first time DER members were able to attend for 3 years.

Prof Michael Henderson was awarded Life Member in 2021, but received it in person this year. Michael is the 16th awardee in the 37 years ofthe association. It is in recognition of sustained and outstanding service to the ASCILITE community, particularly in leadership around its scholarly direction and activities.

DER also congratulates Hua (Flora) Jin for her Best Paper award. Flora is a research student with our colleagues in COLAM, including DER member Yi-Shan Tsai. The paper on learning analytics and feedback can be read here.

Congratulations as well to Josephine Hook and team (includng DER member Prof Michael Henderson) for second place for the Poster awards. The poster builds on their chapter and explores the themes and implications surrouding Educational Design creative risk taking. You can read more about the chapter and see the poster here.

This chapter follows on, and builds upon, our 2020 JTATE article in which we proposed using Bruner’s (1996) frame of folk pedagogies to consider pedagogical approaches suited to synchronous digital online learning in pre-service teacher education in COVID-19 times.

In this chapter we revisit and add to Bruner’s folk pedagogical frame, pointing to implications for practice, including the need to design for learning that considers the nature of delivery with and through technologies. Through an autoethnographic exploration of our use of pedagogies in emerging hybrid learning environments within teacher education programs in 2022, we emphasize the use of asynchronous resources with synchronous learning and the facilitation of student agency..

____________________

Citation:

Creely, E., Henriksen, D., & Henderson, M. (2022). Moving beyond folk pedagogies towards hybrid and blended practices: A reflection on teacher education post-pandemic. In E. Baumgartner, R. Kaplan-Rakowski, R.E. Ferdig, R. Hartshorne, & C. Mouza (Edits.), A Retrospective of teaching, technology, and teacher education during the COVID-19 pandemic (pp. 31-38). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/221522/.

This post was originally published in Code Acts in Education.

Ben Williamson, Kalervo N. Gulson, Carlo Perrotta and Kevin Witzenberger

The global ‘big tech’ company Amazon is increasing its reach and power across a range of industries and sectors, including education. In a new paper for the special symposium ‘Platform Studies in Education’ in Harvard Educational Review, we conceptualize Amazon as a ‘state-like corporation’ influencing education through a ‘connective architecture’ of cloud computing, infrastructure and platform technologies. Like its retail and delivery logistics business it is operating at international scope and scale, and, congruent with Amazon’s growing influence across industries and sectors, possesses the power to reshape a wide range of educational practices and processes.

Our starting point is that education increasingly involves major technology companies, such as Google, Microsoft, and Amazon playing active roles as new kinds of networked governance actors. Infrastructures of test-based accountability and governance in education have long involved technical and statistical organizations. However, contemporary education governance is increasingly ‘data-driven’, using advanced technologies to collect and process huge quantities of digital information about student achievement and school and system performance.

In this context, new digitalized and datafied processes of education governance now involve multinational technology businesses offering infrastructure, platforms and data interoperability services. These connective architectures can affect the ways information is generated and used for institutional decision making, and also introduce new technical affordances into school practices, such as new platform-based learning, API-enabled integrations for increased interoperability, and advanced computing and data processing functionality from cloud infrastructures.

Our analysis focuses on Amazon, specifically its cloud computing subsidiary Amazon Web Services (AWS). Despite significant public, media, and regulatory attention to many of Amazon’s other activities and business practices, its activities in education remain only hazily documented or understood. AWS, we argue, enacts five distinctive operations in education.

Inscribing

The first part of our examination of AWS identifies how its corporate strategy underpins and infuses its objectives for education—a process we call inscribing to refer to the ways technology companies impress their business models on to the education sector. AWS is Amazon’s main profit engine, generating more than 60% of the corporation’s operating profits. Typifying the technoeconomic business model of big tech, it functions as a ‘landlord’ hosting industry, government, state and public sector operations on the cloud, while generating value from the ‘rent’ paid for on-demand access to cutting-edge cloud services, data processing, machine learning and artificial intelligence functionalities.

The ways this process of inscribing the business model on education takes place is evident in commercial marketing and discourse. AWS seeks to establish itself as an essential technical substrate of teaching, learning and administration, promoting its capacity to improve ‘virtual education’, ‘on-demand learning’ and ‘personalized learning’, and to support ‘digital transformation’ through ‘cloud-powered’ services like ‘campus automation’, ‘data analytics platforms’ and ‘artificial intelligence’. These promotional inscriptions paint a seductive picture of ‘pay-as-you-go’ educational improvement and seamless ‘plug-and-play’ transformation.

Beyond being discursive, these transformations require very specific kinds of contractual relations for cloud access, pay-as-you-go plans, and data agreements as per the AWS business model. AWS thus discursively inscribes and materially enacts its business model within education, impressing the techno-economic model of cloud tenancy, pay-as-you-go subscription rents, and computational outsourcing on to the education sector—potentially affecting some of the core functions of education in its pursuit of valuable rent and data extraction. Through this strategy, AWS is fast becoming a key cloud landlord for the education sector, governing the ways schools, colleges and edtech companies can access and use cloud services and digital data, while promoting a transformational vision of education in which its business interests might thrive.

Habituating

The second architectural operation of AWS is its techniques for accustoming users to the functionality of the cloud. We term this habituating users to AWS, or synchronizing human skills to the cloud. It does so through AWS Educate, an educational skills program designed to develop teachers and students’ competencies in cloud computing and readiness for ‘cloud careers’. AWS Educate seeks to establish a positive educational discourse of ‘the cloud’, whereby educators and students are encouraged to develop their skills with AWS services and tools for future personal success, thereby connecting hundreds of thousands of students, educators and institutions and accustoming current and future users to the AWS architecture.

With stated aims to reach 29 millions learners worldwide by 2025, key features of AWS Educate include Cloud Career Pathways and Badges, with dedicated technical courses and credentials aligned to industry job roles like cloud computing engineer and data scientist.  These credentials are underpinned by the Cloud Competency Framework, a global standard used to create, assess, and measure AWS Educate cloud programs informed by the latest labour market data on in-demand jobs. This strategy also serves the goal of increasing user conversions and further AWS adoption and expansion, advancing the business aim of converting user engagement into habitual long-term users as a route to future revenue streams.

In short, through its habituating operations, AWS promotes a normative vision of education as electronic micro-bundles of competency training and credentials, twinned with the habituation of users to its infrastructure. While serving its own revenue maximization prospects, AWS Educate challenges public education values of cultivating informed citizenship with values prioritizing a privatized and platformized education dedicated to the instrumentalist development of a future digital workforce.

Interfacing

The third operation enacted by AWS in education is interfacing. AWS provides new kinds of technical interfaces between educational institutions, intermediary partners, and the AWS infrastructure. This is exemplified by Amazon’s Alexa, a conversational interface, or voice assistant, that sits between users and AWS, and which AWS has begun promoting for integration into other educational applications. Its interfacing operations are achieved by the Alexa Education Skills Kit, a set of standards allowing Alexa to be embedded in third party products and services. We argue it illustrates how application programming interfaces (APIs) act as a connective tissue between powerful global data infrastructures, the digital education platform industry, and educational institutions.

For example, universities can develop their own Alexa Skills in the shape of institutionally branded voice interfaces for students to access coursework, grades and performance data; educators can embed Alexa in classes as voice-enabled quizzes and automated ‘study partners’; and institutions are encouraged to include Alexa Skills in ‘smart campus’ plans.  In these ways, the Alexa Skills Kit provides a set of new AWS-enabled, automated interfaces between institutions, staff and students, mediating an increasing array of institutional relations via the AWS cloud and the automated capacities of Alexa.

The Alexa Education Skills Kit is one of many APIs AWS provides for the educational sector to access fast, scalable, reliable, and inexpensive data storage infrastructures and cloud computing capacities. The integration of automated voice assistants through the Education Skills Kit provides educational institutions a gateway into the core functionality of AWS. These interfaces depend upon the automated collection and analysis of voice data on campuses, its automated analysis in the AWS cloud, and the production of automated feedback, so generating a cascade of automation within institutions that have synchronized their operations with AWS. It normalizes ideals of automation in education, including the extensive data collection and student monitoring that such automation entails. Through its interfacing operations, we therefore argue, AWS and Alexa are advancing cascading logics of automation further into everyday educational routines.

Platforming

Cloud computing establishes the social and technical arrangements that enable other technology companies to build and scale platforms. Amazon has developed an explicit market strategy in education by hosting—or platforming—the wider global industry of education technology on the AWS Cloud, specifically by providing the server hosting, data storage and analytics applications necessary for third parties to build and operate education platforms. Its AWS Imagine conference highlights its aspirations to host a huge range of edtech products and other services, and to guide how the industry imagines the future of education.

The role of AWS in platforming the edtech industry includes back-end server hosting and data storage as well as active involvement in startup development. Many of the globe’s largest and most highly capitalized edtech companies and education businesses are integrated into AWS. AWS support for the edtech industry encompasses data centre and network architecture to ensure that clients can scale their platform, along with data security and other AWS services including content delivery, database, AI, machine learning, and digital end user engagement services. This complete package enables edtech companies to deliver efficient computing, storage, scale, and reliability, and advanced features like data analytics and other AI services.

As such, through its platforming operations, AWS acts as an integral albeit largely invisible cloud presence in the back-end of a growing array of edtech companies. The business model of AWS, and the detailed contractual agreements that startups must sign to access AWS services, construct new kinds of dependencies and technical lock-ins, whereby the functionalities offered by third-party education platform companies can only exist according to the contractual rules and the cloud capacities and constraints of AWS. This puts AWS into a powerful position as a catalyst and accelerator of ‘digital transformation’ in education, ultimately responsible for re-tooling the industry for expanded scale, computational power, and data analytics functionality.

Re-infrastructuring

The final operation we detail is re-infrastructuring, referring to the migration of an educational institution’s digital infrastructure to AWS. It does so through AWS Migration services, and by providing institutions with a suite of data analytics, AI and machine learning functionalities. AWS promises that by ‘using the AWS Cloud, schools and districts can get a comprehensive picture of student performance by connecting products and services so they seamlessly share data across platforms’. AWS also promotes Machine Learning for Education to ‘identify at-risk students and target interventions’ and to ‘improve teacher efficiency and impact with personalized content and AI-enabled teaching assistants and tutors’.

This seamless introduction of AI and automation is enabled by the formation of ‘data lakes’—a repository that hosts multiple types of data for machine learning analysis and visualization in the cloud. The process of ‘architecting a data lake‘ involves the deployment of multiple AWS products and functionalities, including those for pulling data seamlessly from student information and learning management systems, and for handling the ‘machine learning workload’ of analysis. AWS promotes full infrastructure migration to the cloud in terms of making everything from students and staff to estates and operational processes more intelligible from data, and thereby more amenable to targeted action or intervention.

Through cloud migration and data lake architecting, schools and universities are outsourcing a growing range of educational and administrative operations. This ultimately reflects a fresh hierarchical stratification of education, with AWS and its cloud firmly on top, followed by a sprawling ecology of edtech companies that mediate between AWS and the clients at the bottom: the schools and universities that form the data lakes from which AWS derives value. Yet, despite being highly consequential, these infrastructural rearrangements remain opaque, hidden in proprietorial ‘black boxes’, potentially resistant to autonomous institutional decisions, and extremely expensive and challenging to reverse.

‘Big tech’ and ‘state-like corporations’

One key implication we detail in the paper is the growing role of multinational ‘big tech’ companies in education, and the complex ways they are advancing longstanding reform efforts to privatize and commercialize public education, albeit through new techno-economic business models and practices. Social scientific and legal scholarship on private platforms and infrastructures has begun to contend with their growing social, technical and economic power, particularly their implications for key functions and processes traditionally considered the responsibility of state agencies or public sector organizations. As a corporate cloud company, Amazon is attempting to create market dominance and even monopoly power across a multitude of sectors and industries, raising sharp political and legal questions over the appropriate regulatory or antitrust measures to be taken.

Part of this competition is also for infrastructural dominance in education. The expansion of AWS signifies how the governance of the public sector and its institutions is becoming increasingly dependent on the standards and conditions set by multinational big tech corporations like Amazon and Google. Amazon is gathering significant power as what Marion Fourcade and Jeff Gordon term a ‘state-like corporation’. As a corporation with state-like powers, AWS can use its technical and economic capacity to influence diverse education systems and contexts, at international scale, and potentially to fulfil governance roles conventionally reserved for state departments and ministries of education.

As such, the continuing expansion of AWS into education, through the connective architecture we outline in the paper, might substitute existing models of governance and policy implementation with programmable rules and computer scripts for action that are enacted by software directly within schools and colleges rather than mandated from afar by policy prescriptions and proscriptions. As a state-like corporation with international reach and market ambitions, AWS is exceeding the jurisdictional authority of policy centres to potentially become the default digital architecture for governing education globally.

The full paper is available (paywalled) at Harvard Educational Review, or freely available in manuscript form.

This chapter focuses on the creative risk taking involved in educational design and is an exciting collaboration between DER member Prof Michael Henderson and 12 senior Educational Designers embedded centrally and within 9 Faculties.

Educational designers regularly engage in a process of creative risk taking. Inevitably, some designs result in degrees of failure, which need to be productively managed. Surprisingly, creative risk taking and productive failures are rarely discussed or studied in the field of educational design or educational technology.

Through the analysis of educational designer narratives we identified that there is a broad aversion to openly acknowledging the risks and failures. This was partly due to a drive for narratives of success by institutions and education in general, combined with the often precarious positions of the designers themselves who work in a “third space” beside and between educators and students and who therefore have to establish and sustain the trust of those who they work with.

In this chapter and our subsequent work we have identified seven strategies for educational designers and institutional leaders to promote changes in practice:

1. Normalize failure: acknowledge failures in every creative success; actively create time to reflect on practice as a habit; leaders at all levels to role model productive framing of failure.
2. Recognize the emotional labour of failure and vulnerability in engaging with it: acknowledge that it is hard to talk about failure; leaders need to show vulnerability and role model this too; embed emotional intelligence in reflective practice; recognize that educators are often in vulnerable positions as well, feeling at risk in revealing themselves to educational designers.
3. Involve others and resist internalising failure: include educators, students and other diverse perspectives in the design and reflection cycles; adopt or build a supportive community that engenders the sharing of vulnerability and candour.
4. Position failure as part of a process: adopt a designerly mindset – finding solutions is an ongoing cycle of design and redesign; define the role of educational design as a creative endeavour, in which failure is explicitly framed as a possibility.
5. Purposefully build trusting and candid relationships over time: encourage candour through adopting a welcoming and accepting approach to problems, needs and concerns.
6. Question the validity of success criteria: leaders at all levels need to be critical of measures of successful educational design such as grade outcomes and student satisfaction which are usually confounded with competing factors.
7. Revise the language surrounding the work of educational design: leaders need to frame the position descriptions, strategic directions and outcome expectations to include concepts of iteration, experimentation, trialling, prototyping and productive failure.

This study reveals that failure is both an inherent risk in creative educational design work, but failure can also be productive.

Below is a poster presentation of our research – offering the seven strategies themtically organised into three themes of strategic action: shaping expectations, redefining processes, and supporting people..

Citation:

Henderson, M., Abramson, P., Bangerter, M., Chen, M., D’Souza, I., Fulcher, J., Halupka, V., Hook, J., Horton, C., Macfarlan, B., Mackay, R., Nagy, K., Schliephake, K., Trebilco, J. & Vu, T. (2022). Educational design and productive failure: the need for a culture of creative risk taking. In Handbook of Digital Higher Education (pp. 14-25). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800888494.00011

New systematic literature review on instructional video design principles.

Authors: Matt Fyfield, with DER members Michael Henderson and Michael Phillips

The most common theoretical lens used to design and evaluate instructional videos has been to apply principles emerging from the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. However, these principles have been largely developed from research using instructional media other than videos. In addition, there is no comprehensive list of principles that have been shown to improve learning from instructional videos. Therefore, this paper seeks to identify principles of video design that are empirically supported in the literature.

This article provides useful guidance for instructional designers creating educational video content.

In addition to describing the breadth of research in the field, this paper also found that the development of the research field suffers from a lack of coherence and is in urgent need of clear nomenclature and improved reporting of media and research design.

Cover image: Photo by George Milton

As researchers and educators, we often feel ambivalent towards the constant emphasis on impact that dominates many discussions in the academy. We understand that scholarship is meaningless if it fails to engage with history and the material world, but often find the rhetoric that surrounds impact frustrating and leaning towards anti-intellectualism..

We all want to make the world a better place but the tools at our disposal, while analytically sharp, are not exactly known for their political power. Having a clear strategic direction, in touch with current debates but also committed to the peculiar knowledge-seeking nature of the modern University, certainly helps. And yet, it is not entirely clear how the big issues of our time can be turned into impact-generating research problems that lend themselves to the sort of intellectual work we do.

Aware of these challenges, researchers at Monash University and the University of Padova (Padua) have come together. We are two groups of like-minded scholars active in contiguous disciplinary fields, such as education, media studies and youth studies. Our goal is simple: to explore theoretical ideas and methods that will help us develop a much-needed international perspective on similar research problems.

Our small collaboration has even a name: what can STS do for us? STS stands for Science and Technology Studies, and it refers to a broad field of research that examines how technical/scientific innovations shape and are shaped by society and culture. It felt like a sensible choice for our project, on account of the prominent role of science and technology in many of the phenomena we study.  This is not the place to extol the virtues of STS – suffice it to say that there is a certain openness to theoretical and methodological experimentation in this space that feels suited to our interests around the digitally mediated lives of young people: their entanglement with digital platforms in and out of school, their sense of networked belonging, their digitally expressed gender identities, their growing sense of environmental and geopolitical anxiety, and so forth.

On the Monash side, the collaboration involves some researchers from the Digital Education Research (DER) –  hence this post published here – and Monash staff who may not have a direct stake in digital technology but are still interested in productive frameworks that can nurture cross-disciplinarity and inclusiveness. On the Padova side, the research unit Padova Science, Technology and Innovation Studies (Pa.S.T.I.S.) will be involved.

The seeds are being planted – this brief post is just to introduce the collaboration. We will communicate more through various social media channels as plans will begin to take shape. The collaboration will bear fruits further down the line in the form of published outputs and events, and hopefully will lead to larger initiatives with the involvement of civil society and policy: watch this and other spaces on the internet!

Check out some of our profiles here, here and here.

This project is also aligned with the Shaping Digital Futures research priority in the Faculty of Education at Monash– read more about it here.

DER’s Carlo Perrotta and Neil Selwyn have a new article in New Media and Society, which takes a close look at “language models”, complex AI systems like GPT-3 that can simulate human communicative competence in a number of tasks, such as writing and creative composition. The article is critical of these claims and argues instead that the ‘deception’ of these technologies relies on constant human labour which must compensate for and moderate the AI’s shortcomings and, most importantly, the numerous biases that it inherited from its “training data”. Check out the downloadable file (accepted manuscript) here.

Photo by Mauro Sbicego on Unsplash