Critiquing ChatGPT Compositions: Collaborative Annotation as an Approach to Enhancing Students' Metalinguistic Awareness of AI-Generated Writing
Збережено в:
| Опубліковано в:: | Thresholds in Education vol. 48, no. 1 (2025), p. 7 |
|---|---|
| Автор: | |
| Опубліковано: |
Academy for Educational Studies
|
| Предмети: | |
| Онлайн доступ: | Citation/Abstract Full text outside of ProQuest |
| Теги: |
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nab a2200000uu 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 3206892200 | ||
| 003 | UK-CbPIL | ||
| 022 | |a 0196-9641 | ||
| 035 | |a 3206892200 | ||
| 045 | 2 | |b d20250101 |b d20251231 | |
| 084 | |a EJ1468040 | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Li, Ruth | |
| 245 | 1 | |a Critiquing ChatGPT Compositions: Collaborative Annotation as an Approach to Enhancing Students' Metalinguistic Awareness of AI-Generated Writing | |
| 260 | |b Academy for Educational Studies |c 2025 | ||
| 513 | |a Report Article | ||
| 520 | 3 | |a In this article, I introduce a collaborative annotation activity that supports students in critically examining AI-generated writing in relation to criteria including specificity and complexity. I engage students in collaboratively annotating the AI-generated essays, guiding students to identify instances in which the essays could be more specific--clearly defined or identified--and complex--considering various perspectives or aspects of an issue. I then immerse students in reflecting on how the essays could be revised to be more specific and complex. I posit that this exercise sharpens students' metalinguistic awareness of AI writing. By attending closely to AI-generated essays, students critically interrogate AI writing and invite the construction of more nuanced, complicated ideas. Moreover, this exercise enhances students' agency, recasting the learning process as a collaborative, dynamic endeavor that fosters dialogic interactions between humans and AI writers. Ultimately, I open pathways toward more accessible approaches to supporting students' critical engagements with AI. | |
| 653 | |a Artificial Intelligence | ||
| 653 | |a Technology Uses in Education | ||
| 653 | |a Computer Assisted Instruction | ||
| 653 | |a Writing Instruction | ||
| 653 | |a Writing (Composition) | ||
| 653 | |a Documentation | ||
| 653 | |a Metalinguistics | ||
| 653 | |a Collaborative Writing | ||
| 653 | |a Evaluative Thinking | ||
| 653 | |a Essays | ||
| 653 | |a Writing Evaluation | ||
| 653 | |a Critical Thinking | ||
| 653 | |a Feedback (Response) | ||
| 653 | |a Algorithms | ||
| 653 | |a Social Media | ||
| 773 | 0 | |t Thresholds in Education |g vol. 48, no. 1 (2025), p. 7 | |
| 786 | 0 | |d ProQuest |t ERIC | |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |3 Citation/Abstract |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3206892200/abstract/embedded/75I98GEZK8WCJMPQ?source=fedsrch |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |3 Full text outside of ProQuest |u http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1468040 |