Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBeattie, Amanda Russell
dc.contributor.authorHayes, Sarah
dc.contributor.editorDohn, N
dc.contributor.editorJandrić, P
dc.contributor.editorRyberg, T
dc.contributor.editorde Laat, M
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-30T13:23:22Z
dc.date.available2020-03-30T13:23:22Z
dc.date.issued2020-03-27
dc.identifier.citationBeattie A.R., Hayes S. (2020) Whose Domain and Whose Ontology? Preserving Human Radical Reflexivity over the Efficiency of Automatically Generated Feedback Alone. In: Dohn N., Jandrić P., Ryberg T., de Laat M. (eds) Mobility, Data and Learner Agency in Networked Learning. Research in Networked Learning. Springer, Cham, pp. 83-99.en
dc.identifier.isbn9783030369101en
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/978-3-030-36911-8_6en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/623167
dc.descriptionThis is an accepted manuscript of a chapter published in Dohn N., Jandrić P., Ryberg T., de Laat M. (eds) Mobility, Data and Learner Agency in Networked Learning. Research in Networked Learning. Springer, Cham, available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36911-8_6 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.en
dc.description.abstractIn this chapter, we challenge an increase in the uncritical application of algorithmic processes for providing automatically generated feedback for students, within a neoliberal framing of contemporary higher education. Initially, we discuss our concerns alongside networked learning principles, which developed as a critical pedagogical response to new online learning programmes and platforms. These principles now overlap too, with the notion that we are living in ‘postdigital’ times, where automatically generated feedback never stands alone, but is contested and supplemented by physical encounters and human feedback. First, we make observations on the e-marking platform Turnitin, alongside other rapidly developing artificial intelligence (AI) systems. When generic (but power-laden) maps are incorporated into both student and staff ‘perceived’ spaces through AI, we surface the aspects of feedback that risk being lost. Second, we draw on autoethnographic understandings of our own lived experience of performing radically reflexive feedback within a Master’s in Education programme. A radically reflexive form of feedback may not follow a pre-defined map, but it does offer a vehicle to restore individual student and staff voices and critical self-navigation of both physical and virtual learning spaces. This needs to be preserved in the ongoing shaping of the contemporary ‘postdigital’ university.en
dc.formatapplication/pdfen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherSpringer International Publishingen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesResearch in Networked Learningen
dc.relation.urlhttps://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-030-36911-8_6en
dc.subject‘postdigital’ universityen
dc.subjectRadical reflexivityen
dc.subjectAlgorithmsen
dc.subjectAutomatically generated feedbacken
dc.subjectcritical pedagogyen
dc.titleWhose Domain and Whose Ontology? Preserving Human Radical Reflexivity over the Efficiency of Automatically Generated Feedback Aloneen
dc.typeChapter in booken
dc.date.updated2020-03-27T16:19:02Z
dc.date.accepted2019-04-30
rioxxterms.funderUniversity of Wolverhamptonen
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUOW30032020SHen
rioxxterms.versionAMen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/policies/accepted-manuscript-termsen
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-03-27en
dc.source.booktitleMobility, Data and Learner Agency in Networked Learning
dc.source.beginpage83
dc.source.endpage99
dc.description.versionPublished version
refterms.dateFCD2020-03-30T13:16:23Z
refterms.versionFCDAM


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Beattie_Hayes_Whose_domain_and ...
Size:
400.4Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record