By Yiren Kong Educational Research & Grant Development Specialist yiren.kong@stonybrook.edu
Virtual reality (VR), characterized by its immersive experiences and interactive capabilities within virtual environments, has the ability to enhance educational experiences. The unique characteristics of VR and the availability of low-budget VR headsets in recent years signal great potential in using VR as a learning tool on a large(r) scale to help students learn effectively. Additionally, the growing popularity of VR in everyday lives speaks to a need to provide opportunities for students to familiarize themselves with VR at school.
Inspired by and building upon these premises, the Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT) at Stony Brook University has held a series of hands-on VR workshops over the past year to showcase the possibilities of using VR in higher education classrooms as an alternative learning option. This series of professional development events have been well received by faculty and staff members across both east and west campuses. Many have expressed interest in continuing the conversation with us and exploring feasible ways to integrate VR into their classrooms. Reflections on these events and discussions with different stakeholders has revealed the importance of helping faculty and staff members to have a deeper and more comprehensive grasp of VR, which could help them in make an informed decision about whether and how they will use VR as an optional learning tool to facilitate their students’ learning experiences.
Our VR studio is a great space for those looking to learn more about VR/AR in the classroom.
In order to familiarize faculty and staff members with VR as an effective learning option, CELT has made multiple efforts. In addition to offering workshops and collaborating with interested faculty members on research and grant projects centered around the theme of VR, CELT also just soft-launched a VR studio in Harriman Hall after working on the space for more than half a year. This VR studio serves as a collaborative space for faculty members to work closely with experienced instructional designers and educational researchers at CELT to develop VR learning activities.
The CELT VR studio features two VR stations which present two very different VR solutions and experiences. The first station is powered by an HTC VIVE and a gaming PC which is capable of providing a highly visual and immersive experience. The second station features a Meta Quest 2, which is an all-in-one headset that offers affordability, convenience, and accessibility. Different from the HTC VIVE, Meta Quest 2 does not need to be connected with a computer at all and can run VR applications by itself. Besides, the price for a Meta Quest 2 is much lower than an HTC VIVE, at the cost of lower graphic quality and performance.
Headsets such as the Meta Quest series have made VR more accessible to those who are interested.
Empirical research has pointed out that VR, when being used appropriately in a suitable learning environment, could help with both learning experience and outcomes. Moreover, integrating VR in classrooms could help mitigate digital divide and enable upward social mobility for underrepresented students in this digital age. If you are interested in developing a VR learning activity and try out in your classroom, or if you just simply want to learn more about VR, feel free to come and work with us in the newly launched CELT VR studio (appointment needed).
By Shyam Sharma Associate Professor and Graduate Program Director Program in Writing and Rhetoric shyam.sharma@stonybrook.edu
Last year, students in my WRT 102 class systematically explored how AI chatbots can help them as writers–that is, if they learn how to use the tools effectively and responsibly. By breaking down the process of writing a research-based paper into a step-by-step process, my students asked ChatGPT to assist them with a few dozen different tasks related to those steps. The result has so far been fascinatingly mixed.
Unfortunately, most faculty across campus do not have the luxury of time (i.e., small class), teaching experience/expertise (in some cases), or the curricular space that writing teachers do in order to engage their students in the research and writing processes with the assistance of AI or not.With these challenges in mind, the following are some strategies that can be helpful to colleagues across campus:
Time
The first challenge, lack of time, is most significant for faculty teaching larger classes. Natural language processing tools can be a convenient way to reduce time and labor that writing-intensive assignments require from instructors. Unfortunately, this convenience comes with a number of risks, including plagiarism and the bypassing of learning/skill development. Consequently, all instructors who assign writing might also have to allocate some time on writing instruction as well as time to help students use the new tools effectively and responsibly.
Finding ways to effectively incorporate AI into assignments can be a time consuming process.
Adopting the “writing to learn” (WTL) approach (rather than just “learning to write”) can justify the investment of some time for teaching writing, as it helps students “discover” ideas and perspectives, “create” connections and structures, and “interpret” text or the real world around them. If writing needs to mediate learning, then it must be seen as more than merely a means for encoding pre-existing ideas in words; it calls for assisting students in the process, including for using AI tools productively and responsibly.
With some scaffolding/support and the right approach, even a small amount of time to help students use AI tools meaningfully can greatly help to harness the power of writing as a means for learning, fostering disciplinary identity, and preparing for professional careers. Below I share a range of strategies to optimize whatever little time faculty can invest.
Trust
Trust is the second challenge when individualized attention is not feasible, and AI tools can complicate this even further. I started my teaching experiments with AI using a simple rule–“cite what you use”–but even in a small class, that simple rule didn’t survive the complexity of how students use the tools. Students used chatbots in too many ways in the process and couldn’t just cite specific words or ideas!
My experience so far is that the only thing we can do is to develop trust in our students, as we help them develop their own “brain muscles” for research and writing skills, with or without using AI tools. AI tools are making academic integrity issues too complex to address through any technologies or policies. With that said, they can also enhance writing if used effectively and responsibly.
Trust between students and instructors is an important part of teaching students how to use AI in a beneficial and productive manner.
In place of doubt and distrust, we must teach our students where to draw the line for themselves. We can no longer just specify “requirements” like page or word count, topic or method specifications, number of citations or strategies of source engagement, etc. We should help students understand and achieve the goals of the assignment by using appropriate tools and resources. We should help students answer their own educational questions: Why am I in this course? What skills will I develop if I invest adequate time and effort–including with AI assistance?
Broadly put, educators are bound to shift focus from policing plagiarism to bolstering originality, from requirements to commitment toward learning, from fear to interest, from policy statements to support, from challenge to confidence, from moralizing to motivating. Students can best decide when and how to use AI tools if they possess sufficient skills and confidence and are inspired enough to take on the challenges of learning.
Teaching
Beyond allocating some time and shifting focus toward trust building, faculty across the disciplines need new teaching strategies to mitigate the challenges posed by AI tools. That requires first educating students what “writing” means in the context of learning and in relation to AI.
Some students ask: Could we soon be just asking AI to do all our writing? This question views writing as a product, ignoring that the use of a text generator in the process of learning is fundamentally different from a businessperson using it to cut costs, a father using it to make lasagna, or a freelance journalist using it to speed up writing. Unlike other users, students must use writing to develop their own brain muscles for researching and reading, summarizing and synthesizing, citing and engaging sources, developing and defending an intellectual position, organizing and creating flow in her ideas, and so on–with and without using AI tools as they become more and more a part of our world. Simply asking a chatbot to “do” these things for us is more like asking for the answer to all math problems and less like using a calculator to better handle the more complex ones.
Professors should also identify and address distinct challenges posed by AI use in writing processes in different disciplines and professions, from the ethical in medicine to the legal in engineering to the financial in business. Creating and using machine-generating language requires more layers of responsibilities for “languaging” than we have always known. This calls for some teaching of “critical AI literacy” skills–including technical skills, rhetorical savvy, and political and ethical considerations.
It is important that students understand not only the “what” regarding any assignment but the importance of “why” it is important as well.
To summarize, a little time, a focus on trust, and a few teaching strategies could turn a menace into a meaningful resource. From their explorations so far, my students have created a list of tasks that ChatGPT can (potentially) assist them write better, faster, etc–that is, if they have the skills and invest the time to make that assistance meaningful: finds sources**, suggest new ideas or perspectives*, help to brainstorm or start writing*, jog memory on a topic, find/generate basic knowledge about a topic**, outline a paper*, write up thesis statements and topic sentences*, elaborate topic sentences or citation*, tighten and otherwise revise draft*, recognize rhetorical strategies in samples, change style of draft such as by reducing jargons, give feedback or critique on draft*, edit for clarity and correctness, etc. In the list above, to represent the cautions my students say are necessary, I’ve used two asterisks where they’ve flagged it for unreliability (such as making up sources and facts) and one asterisk for other kinds of problems.
I must also add that my class has found that ChatGPT isn’t very reliable even with papers based on library and internet research–not to mention papers that are lab-based or fieldwork-based, creative or contextual, culturally informed or sensitive. And yet, where there is instructional support and seriousness on the part of student writers, the tool becomes more and more useful. Hence the need for some time and trust. In contrast, instructors who simply assign essays and wait for the deadline are going to receive papers, paragraphs, or paraphrases based on chatbots from many students.
With the three major challenges above in mind, as well as the cautions, I would like to share a class handout that I created for AI-assisted writing instruction for a research-based paper. Please adapt any part of it as it best serves the needs of your courses and assignments in your disciplines and contexts. The handout can be found at the link below.
As a creative writing and literature teacher, I find myself in a unique position, having grown up in India and now teaching undergraduate students at Stony Brook University. My first language, Hindi, gifts me with a strong Indian accent when I speak English, and I fear that my words may be misunderstood by my students. At times, I worry that some students may wonder why an Indian woman is teaching Creative Writing & Literature in English. To address these concerns, I’ve designed a more inclusive syllabus that features stories and essays from writers of different countries, races, and backgrounds. My course, “Everyone has a story, let’s find yours,” helps students explore their voice through writing and tell their important stories. In class, we read stories from all over the world, including translated texts. Over time, I’ve realized that good stories don’t need to be written in a specific language to be considered good. The best stories transcend language and vocabulary limitations.
Students used MuBaBaO blocks to build and brainstorm their ideas for their stories.
In our class discussions about Arundhati Roy’s essay, “What is the morally appropriate language to think & write?” my students have diverse opinions. They often relate to the idea that we’re not always understood by even people who speak the same language as us. Surprisingly, about a quarter of the class is multilingual. They’re amazed when I share that the language of storytelling is not as crucial as evoking universal emotions and interest.
To overcome language barriers in storytelling, I introduced wooden blocks from MuBaBaO into our creative journey. Originating from Poland, these wooden blocks, also known as creative thinking blocks, were brought to us by the distinguished storyteller Michal Malinowski, who uses them in his own classroom while teaching undergraduate students at the University of Krakow. Prior to that, Michal employed these blocks with war refugees from Ukraine, who found it easier to articulate their experiences using building blocks rather than struggling with broken words and sentences. In Michal’s own words, ‘the blocks serve as a vehicle for storytelling, an instrument to make sense out of the chaos and create something out of nothing.’
When used in my class, the blocks sparked my students’ imagination. They built intricate structures like spaceships, bicycles, basketball courts, carriages, and houses. Each creation had a unique story behind it, reflecting the individuality of its creator. Even reserved students opened up and shared their creations. This exercise went beyond storytelling; it became a form of problem-solving and an exercise in critical thinking and communication. It reminded me that stories have historically been a way to address complex challenges. What’s remarkable is the impact these blocks have beyond the classroom. They create a means for interaction and collaborative artwork within the community.
MuBaBaO blocks helped students think creatively and solve problems during the writing process.
Exploratory studies with similar blocks showed that they can help learners understand course concepts, experience group dynamics, and build communication skills (Allen et al., 2009, Auvinen et al., 2013, Rick et al., 2005, Roos et al., 2004, Roos et al., 2018, Peabody et al., 2018). This visual approach to storytelling engages participants in dynamic and multi-layered exercises, fostering creative thinking, spatial intelligence, and effective communication. It adds depth by requiring participants to narrate a story related to their creation, including considering solutions to real-world challenges. These blocks can act as a universal language, uniting people from diverse backgrounds through the shared language of imagination and expression. They can also be applied in various fields to enhance organizational and leadership skills. Together, we can embark on a journey of discovery and growth, learning to appreciate the depth and power of storytelling beyond spoken words, and embracing the beauty of diverse voices in literature.
References:
Allen, S. J. and Hartman, N. S. (2009), “Sources of learning in student leadership development programming”, Journal of Leadership Studies, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 6-16. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.20119
Auvinen, T., Aaltio, I. and Blomqvist, K. (2013), “Constructing leadership by storytelling- the meaning of trust and narrative”, Leadership and Organization Development Journal, Vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 496-514. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2011-0102
Rick, J., & Lamberty, K. K. (2005). Medium-based design: Extending a medium to create an exploratory learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 13(3), 179–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820500401883
Roos, J., & Victor, B. (2018). How It All Began: The Origins Of LEGO® Serious Play®. International Journal of Management and Applied Research, 326–343. https://doi.org/10.18646/2056.54.18-025
Peabody, M. A., & Turesky, E. F. (2018). Shared leadership lessons: Adapting LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® in higher education. International Journal of Management and Applied Research, 5(4), 210-223.
As you start to think about next steps in your academic and/or professional career, you may find that you will be asked to either write or revise a teaching statement or a statement of teaching philosophy. A teaching statement, or statement of teaching philosophy, is a reflective essay that often includes what you value as an educator and why this is important to you, a description of how you would teach, the justification for why you teach that way, and evidence of how you have been effective.
Teaching statements are more common these days and have become a largely important part of academic life.
The first time writing a statement like this can be a bit daunting, confusing, and often leads to questions on how to write an effective statement. Here are some questions I often hear:
What if I don’t have much teaching experience?
You probably have more than you think. Informal teaching experiences can also inform your statement. Some examples include training students in your lab (protocols, data analysis, etc.), summer students, mentoring student assistants in work environments, working with Undergraduate Teaching Assistants (UGTAs), or participating in teaching professional development, such as CELT workshops. If you have been a graduate TA, can your course director give you some feedback on your teaching? Can you guest lecture in the course your PI or a colleague teaches? In absence of any of the above, you should show that you have thought intentionally about what you value as an educator, how you would achieve this in the classroom, and how you would tell you were effective.
How do I stand out from other applicants in the statement?
Hook your readers right at the start. Your opening sentence should be strong and reflect personal experiences that have made a large impact on your philosophy. Avoid cliche terms and academic jargon to engage your readers. Instead, focus on how you can not only “tell” your reader about your experiences but “show” them by bringing specific stories from your teaching experiences into your writing. Ultimately, an honest account of your experiences and passion towards your work in the field is going to be more impactful to your audience than a general statement.
Are detailed technical approaches in the classroom required in the statement?
The more specific you can be with examples and evidence, the stronger your statement will be. Different positions will weigh the teaching statement differently, such as research intensive vs. teaching intensive, but either way, the more specific details about your experiences that you can include in your statement the better. Your examples should be concise, however, as there is typically a 2-page limit for the statement. If you are applying for a teaching focused position, citing the learning sciences literature the same way you would in your research is recommended.
Should I include DEI elements in my teaching statement?
If you and the institution you are applying to similarly value DEI then yes, include specific elements of inclusive teaching in your statement. You may also be asked to write a separate diversity statement which would rely less on teaching and more on your lived experiences, mentoring, and community engagement. You don’t want the specific examples in the statements to overlap.
Can I incorporate positive comments received about my teaching in the statement?
Yes! You would not want this to take up a lot of text in your statement, so use sparingly and concisely, and be sure they speak to specific skills and successes that you have been recognized for (not: “they were a great teacher!”). This is another great way to incorporate evidence of your teaching effectiveness in your statement.
When your personal statement is relevant and authentic, it communicates the passion that you have for the work in your field clearly and confidently. Personal writing can be difficult but following the guidance from these common questions when writing your statement can put you in a great position to write an impactful statement!
In my previous post, I outlined the problem that many undergraduate students do not take full advantage of faculty office hours, and gave a few suggestions for how instructors can encourage more students to attend. In this post, I want to take a look at another aspect of the problem: many instructors do not believe that it is their responsibility to encourage students to attend. The question guiding this post is: Why not? What assumptions underlie how instructors view their responsibilities around office hours?
To try to answer this question, I visited three instructors during their office hours and asked each of them what they were doing to encourage students to attend. Two said they included on the syllabus when and where office hours would be held. The third not only included when and where they would be, but invited students to drop by if they have specific questions, need extra help with the assignments, or if they simply want to talk. Of the three, he was the only one who had any students attend office hours within the first six weeks of the semester.
Do you explain to your students why they should come to office hours? Why or why not?
The first two instructors gave revealing answers about why they do not explicitly encourage students to attend. One explained that she expected students would attend if they had specific questions or wanted to discuss their grades on significant assignments. The other expected students to be able to monitor their own progress and assess for themselves whether to seek extra help in office hours. In other words, both assumed that students already know what office hours are for, and thought that there was no need to explain that asking specific questions, discussing assignments, or seeking extra help are reasons to attend.
However, recent research brings to light how these assumptions put certain students at a disadvantage. Assumptions around the proper use of office hours are part of the “hidden curriculum” of a university: those unspoken rules and expectations about how to interact socially with instructors and how to take advantage of institutional resources. As Anthony Abraham Jack notes, students rely on “cultural competencies developed before college” to navigate the hidden curriculum, but not all high schools have the resources to support students in developing such competencies (Jack, 2016). For instance, the “doubly disadvantaged” – students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds who enter college without any kind of prep or private school experience – tend to “lack the skill set or desire to engage faculty, even as they perceive their peers reaping the benefits of forging relationships” (Jack, 2016). These so-called “doubly disadvantaged” students experience higher degrees of disengagement, to the extent that some feel unable to reach out to professors even when they are at risk of failing a class. One student reports that she did not realize that she needed to contact her professor until he reached out to her first: “Even though he said if you don’t turn in this paper you’ll fail, it wasn’t until I received that email that I realized I needed to email him” (Jack, 2016). While many students eventually learn the skills to engage with faculty and to advocate for themselves academically over time, they may also miss out on access to institutional resources and opportunities to build relationships until sophomore or for some, even the junior year. That could mean missed opportunities to apply for summer jobs, internships, grants, and other experiences that enrich the curriculum and lead to careers after graduation.
Jack’s research highlights the importance of meeting students where they are, rather than where we expect them to be. It is not fair to assume that all of our students know how to seek support when they are struggling. Since very simple things like explaining what office hours are for or emailing students who are falling behind can contribute significantly to creating an accessible and inclusive learning environment, we as instructors ought to do more to normalize this practice in our institutions.
Reference
Jack, A. A. (2016). (No) harm in asking: Class, acquired cultural capital, and academic engagement at an elite university. Sociology of Education, 89(1), 1-19.
Researchers from Ball State University are conducting teaching related research that explores faculty views and practices about sharing teaching materials. This study is looking for participants from a cross-disciplinary group of faculty and welcomes your participation.
If you have taught at least one college-level class as the primary instructor, you are eligible to participate in this study. Participation involves completing a survey that will take approximately 20-30 minutes to complete. Participants are eligible to receive one of 10 Tango gift cards valued at $10 each.
The study (Materials Dissemination) has been approved by the Ball State University Institutional Review Board (IRBNet ID 1649675-1).
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Kelsey Thiem (kthiem@bsu.edu, 765-285-8048) or Mary Kite (mkite@bsu.edu, 765-285-8197). For your rights as a research participant, you may contact the Office of Research Integrity, Ball State University, Muncie, IN 47306, (765) 285-5052, orihelp@bsu.edu.
