Login
Is there a "right" way to speak, or is language policing more revealing about the anxiety of the scolder than the expression of the speaker?
The post The Power Imbalances of Language Policing appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.
Shamsi Brinn (UX Manager at arXiv) and Bill Kasdorf (Principal of Kasdorf & Associates, LLC) discuss the recent Accessibility Forum hosted by arXiv. Over 2,000 people registered for the Forum; over 350 attended the live event; and hundreds more are accessing the recently published videos.
The post Guest Post — Making Research Accessible: The arXiv Accessibility Forum Moved the Action Upstream appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, an aspiring philosopher asks:
I am a prospective PhD student from the Global South. I have a BA and MA Philosophy from a the national university of my country (although virtually unknown outside). I aspire to study in the top UK and US philosophy departments became the philosophers I wanted to work with are there. I wanted to get some advice on what can I do to possibly compete (or at least equalize the playing field) with PhD applicants from top Philosophy departments in the UK or US (say top 25 in Leiter’s PGR). I only have one publication so far (published in Synthese), but I am assuming that my degree and recommendation letters wouldn’t be viewed as at par with those from my Western counterparts, and I am worried that this automatically disadvantages me. What do you think are my chances getting in the top Philosophy programs? What should be the things that I should highlight in my application that could help my case? Thank you and I appreciate your thoughts.
Fair questions, and I'm curious to hear from readers, particularly those who have experience in PhD admissions. Obviously, all things being equal, having a publication in Synthese should be a clear advantage, but aside from this, I'm not sure.
What do readers think? Any tips for the OP?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
Here’s a follow-up question to our recent discussions of perception, personal politics, and the job market:
Let’s say I work on a historical philosophical subject that is not evidently political (even though I secretly think it is), and that I also teach philosophy of religion semi-regularly. Let’s say I’m also a member (non-TT) of a department that has issued pro-BLM and pro-Roe-v.-Wade statements with which I wholeheartedly agree. If I link to those statements on my personal website, how would that be perceived? Again, my support is genuine, but I also hope to show search committee members where I stand in a politically ambiguous subfield.
Interesting question. For those of you new to the discussion being referred to, a number of people indicated here that they have a bias against people who work in philosophy of religion.
Bearing this in mind, what do you all think? Should someone like the OP (above) try to broadcast their progressive political views to combat any such bias?
“Bresee helps the youth and those who are most disadvantaged. Serving Koreatown, a primarily Hispanic community, and advocate for the need of bringing peace to our community. By focusing on the youth, Bresee is able to build a better future where everyone is given equal opportunities and leads them to a successful future.” – Youth... Read more »
The post A Holistic College and Career Readiness Practice appeared first on Connected Learning Alliance.
The positive benefits of youth interacting with technology are often ignored while the negatives are emphasized. It’s time for that to change. In a commitment to this effort, the Connected Learning Alliance, along with the Connected Learning Lab at the University of California, Irvine, are excited to share the new Connected Wellbeing Initiative with the... Read more »
The post The Connected Wellbeing Initiative: Building Understanding and Action Regarding Teens’ Technology Use and Their Mental Health appeared first on Connected Learning Alliance.
“As a child that’s one thing that my parents really instilled in us as children is to know who you are and identify with what is most connected to you…We are Black people. We are of African descent. That is the culture. That’s how I was raised. That’s what I know. That’s who I am.... Read more »
The post Timbuk2 – Anchored in a Historical Legacy of Care and Spirituality appeared first on Connected Learning Alliance.
Our work at Lumen is focused on eliminating race and income as predictors of student success in the US postsecondary setting. One thing we’ve learned as we’ve worked to erase this persistent gap in academic performance is that it is far easier to “slide the gap to the right” than it is to close it. In other words, interventions intended to benefit the lowest performing students often benefit all students, so that everyone’s academic performance improves. That’s great from one perspective – everyone learned more! But rather than decreasing the size of the gap, these interventions leave the gap in tact and nudge it up the scale to the right. Interventions that have an accurately targeted effect can be hard to find.
For this reason, I was particularly excited to see Experimental Evidence on the Productivity Effects of Generative Artificial Intelligence, a new study from researchers at MIT which finds that access to ChatGPT dramatically reduces productivity inequality on writing tasks. The abstract reads:
We examine the productivity effects of a generative artificial intelligence technology—the assistive chatbot ChatGPT—in the context of mid-level professional writing tasks. In a preregistered online experiment, we assign occupation-specific, incentivized writing tasks to 444 college-educated professionals, and randomly expose half of them to ChatGPT. Our results show that ChatGPT substantially raises average productivity: time taken decreases by 0.8 SDs [37%, or from 27 minutes to 17 minutes] and output quality rises by 0.4 SDs [a 0.75 point increase in grade on a 7 point scale]. Inequality between workers decreases, as ChatGPT compresses the productivity distribution by benefiting low-ability workers more. ChatGPT mostly substitutes for worker effort rather than complementing worker skills, and restructures tasks towards idea-generation and editing and away from rough-drafting. Exposure to ChatGPT increases job satisfaction and self-efficacy and heightens both concern and excitement about automation technologies.
That kind of result gets me excited! Simultaneously decreasing inequity while increasing self-efficacy and satisfaction? Yes, please!
Section 2.3 explicitly discusses productivity inequality, describing how access to ChatGPT helped close that gap:
The control group exhibits persistent productivity inequality: participants who score well on the first task also tend to score well on the second task. As Figure 2 Panel (a) shows, there is a correlation of 0.49 between a control participant’s average grade on the first task and their average grade on the second task. In the treatment group, initial inequalities are half-erased by the treatment [access to ChatGPT]: the correlation between first-task and second-task grades is only 0.25 (p-value on difference in slopes = 0.004). This reduction in inequality is driven by the fact that participants who scored lower on the first round benefit more from ChatGPT access, as the figure shows: the gap between the treatment and control lines is much larger at the left-hand end of the x-axis. (p. 5)
There seems to be real promise here for making progress toward closing the equity gap in education. However, what we see positively as “productivity gains” in the world of work is often seen negatively as “cheating” in the world of school. And while there are certainly challenges to navigate here, results like those in this paper from MIT make our efforts to navigate them effectively all the more critical as we work to close the equity gap.
On behalf of the Connected Learning Summit Conference Committee, we are pleased to announce the publication of the Proceedings of the 2022 Connected Learning Summit. It is our honor to share with you a proceedings that celebrates participatory, playful, and transformative learning. In 2021, the Connected Learning Summit became a fully online event, supporting inclusive,... Read more »
The post Proceedings of the 2022 Connected Learning Summit Released appeared first on Connected Learning Alliance.
Robert Harington talks to Annie Callanan, Chief Executive of Taylor & Francis, in this new series of perspectives from some of Publishing’s leaders across the non-profit and profit sectors of our industry.
The post Chefs de Cuisine: Perspectives from Publishing’s Top Table — Annie Callanan appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.
Avi Staiman discusses the value that ChatGPT can bring to scholarly communication, particularly leveling the playing field for English as an Additional Language authors.
The post Guest Post — Academic Publishers Are Missing the Point on ChatGPT appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.
Robert Harington talks to Ziyad Marar, President of Global Publishing at SAGE, and author of "Happiness Paradox" and "Intimacy", and most recently “Judged: The Value of Being Misunderstood"
The post Chefs de Cuisine: Perspectives from Publishing’s Top Table — Ziyad Marar appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.
Robert Harington and Alison Mudditt, CEO of PLOS, in conversation in this series of perspectives from some of Publishing’s leaders across the non-profit and profit sectors of our industry.
The post Chefs de Cuisine: Perspectives from Publishing’s Top Table – – Alison Mudditt appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.
The first and second authors of this blog post were teens in the the middle 2010s and the early 2000s, respectively. We experienced a media landscape vastly different from each other as well as the present day. Media devices were more limited, Internet connections were constrained; user-generated content or social media was barely on the... Read more »
The post Mobilizing Teen-Centered Research Findings for Teen-Oriented Storytelling appeared first on Connected Learning Alliance.
FreshRSS