New university task force works on clearer protocols around use of AI tools in the classroom, provides provisional guidelines ahead of the fall semester
The recent rise in generative artificial intelligence use has pushed universities to address the lack definitive and researched protocols for its use in the classroom.
On May 1, 2023, the Paul R. MacPherson Institute for Leadership, Innovation and Excellence in Teaching launched their Generative Artificial Intelligence in Teaching and Learning Task Force. The task force’s goal is to better understand the impact of generative AI through an educational lens and develop recommendations for policies around its use for at McMaster University.
"Task Force members representing all six Faculties included faculty, undergraduate and graduate students, staff and senior administrators. The efforts of this diverse group of experts are summarized in a Final Report. . .The Final Report will also include recommendations for continued work across all areas of the University, which may include research, teaching and learning and staff work,” said Kim Dej and Matheus Grasselli, co-chairs of the task force, in a written statement.
On Sept. 10, they will submit their recommendations to Susan Tighe, provost and vice president (academic), after which they will undergo further review before being released.
Until this is completed the provisional guidelines have been released by the university to help guide the use of generative AI in the meantime.
As McMaster prepares to release its specific policies and guide for generative AI, everyone is encouraged to use the provisional guidelines and resources provided on the Generative Artificial Intelligence in Teaching and Learning website.
Transparency is at the core of these guidelines. Instructors are permitted to integrate generative AI tools, such as Chat GPT, into their courses, if they so choose, but they must communicate clearly with their students the extent to which these tools will be and are permitted to be used.
When it comes to student work and assessments, while instructors are again permitted to integrate generative AI tools into these tasks, unless told otherwise, students should operate with the assumption that the use of these tools is not permitted.
If members of the McMaster educational community have any comments or concerns about the Provisional Guideline provided and future guidelines they are encouraged to share through the task forces form.
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
By: Emma Mulholland
Next month, McMaster is saying farewell to its mainframe computer, which will no longer be open to general access as of March 18.
The mainframe computers have been used at McMaster since the late 1960s. The computer that is currently in the process of being decommissioned was initiated at McMaster in the 1980s.
“[The mainframe computer] refers to a specific machine, that actually sits in a space … in a larger, more abstract sense it’s a set of applications that are on a specific hardware, that use a specific operating system, coded in specific ways … it’s the whole operating system,” explained Sheldon Smart, Public Relations Manager with the McMaster Office of Public Relations.
Most of the technology used in the mainframe date back to the mainframe’s beginnings in the 1980s, and include applications no longer beneficial to the university. “We no longer use those applications, or we’re phasing them out. There are a few left that we’re just in the last stages of turning off, then we will get rid of that hardware,” said Smart.
McMaster is now transitioning a new Enterprise Resource Planning system. “[The mainframe] was quite high performance hardware in its time. Back in the day, mainframe computing was all there was. But now there are many options, some of which suit what we are doing here better,” said Smart.
Mosaic, the student service centre introduced last year, is part of the new ERP system. With the introduction of the ERP system, it is no longer necessary to maintain the old mainframe hardware and software, so the university is in the process of shutting it down.
“Mosaic uses different hardware, software and base operating systems than the previous system, the mainframe … we no longer need the mainframe — this is just part of a natural transition,” said Smart.
With the introduction of the ERP system, it is no longer necessary to maintain the mainframe hardware and software, so the university is in the process of shutting it down.
Mosaic’s ability to integrate information from various sources, such as student records and financial accounts, is representative of the new ERP system as a whole. “The hallmark of ERP is that it tends to combine multiple pieces: our finance system, human resources system, student administration system . . . they all interconnect with each other,” explained Smart.
The new system allows easier access to transcripts and the ability to independently choose class timetables. McMaster is not the first institution to make the move to more integrated systems. Western University and the University of Waterloo both use similar programs to what is now implemented at McMaster.
As with any new structure, it will take some time to get used to the new system. Regardless, there are many advantages to the new ERP system when compared to the mainframe, which was limited in its capabilities due its age.
“It will take some time for the university to become completely comfortable with all the new functions, but in comparison the system it replaced was set up in the early 1980s,” said Smart. Anyone who is interested in keeping track of the mainframe’s last days can visit the University Technology Services website to find a timer counting down to the mainframe’s official end, as well as a more detailed history of computing at McMaster.
Photo Credit: Sheldon Smart
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
By: Saad Ejaz
DeltaHacks, an event organized by the HackitMac, held their second annual student hackathon at McMaster University on Jan. 16 and 17. The event proceeded with great momentum as over 300 students across Ontario came together to hack for positive change.
Beginning on Saturday morning, teams from different disciplines worked together for 24 hours to create a hack for positive change. A number of professionals, including doctors and professors, assisted the student-led teams. Coding mentors were also present, and helped students apply their ideas.
The event was focused around encouraging students to build and hack for social change. This could include health and wellness, sustainability or education.
The event yielded a total of over 50 unique project submissions. The winning project was a healthcare initiative by “Hips Don’t Lie”, a team of three: Mushfiqur Rahman, Hassan Muhammad and Stephen Murray. The trio worked with a McMaster orthopediatrician to create a web-app that uses x-ray images to diagnose a physiological condition known as femoroacetabular impingement through image processing algorithms.
Mohamed Fouda, a member of HackitMac, explained that the initiative started with the intent of creating positive change. “Here at McMaster we have great attention to social impact … we have a society program, we have Engineers Without Borders, we have Doctors Without Borders … we thought, okay, our hackathon should focus on projects that have a meaning to them. So we tried to encourage students to not just build anything, but try to give a thought before building, for a problem your hack would be able to solve,” said Fouda.
Students were encouraged to continue refining and building their projects even after the competition. Melissa Lam, a second year mechatronics student and a member of HackitMac, stresses on the importance of trying new things. “You got to go out and try new things … you got to give it a try, you got to fail,” she said. “You got to see the road, and that’s what university is for, to go out and do new things.”
Fouda added that the group hopes to do more in the future. “In terms of our long term vision, we have hit our milestones but we are still far from [finished]. The reason why we have HackitMac and DeltaHacks is because we are trying to create this community of people here at Mac just building stuff. They are trying, they are failing, and then they are trying again and then they are failing again … And they keep learning from mistakes and keep building … collaborating between different faculties, backgrounds, they share knowledge, they innovate and they build and solve problems.”
The team at HackitMac and DeltaHacks has received a great response and support in their first two years. They hope to continue inspiring groups to take on new ideas and work towards positive change.
Photo Credit: Jin Lee
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
By: Sabrina Bene
Laptops have become the norm in lecture halls as more students bring them to take notes in class. Some professors believe that they have become a distraction rather than a tool to help students learn. I believe that despite this, electronics supply students with unlimited possibilities to enhance their learning experience in lecture. With technology constantly advancing, students are able to increase the amount of information obtained, and apply it in various ways.
The restriction of electronics would have more negative effects than positive. A laptop allows students to follow along with what the professor is saying, while allowing them to quickly jot down important information. Allowing laptops in lectures allows the student to clarify information that may have been confusing. Students are able to follow along with visual data provided by the professor, and are given a chance to interact with the material. For example, the program “TopHat,” which has been introduced in select classes on campus, requires students to bring their laptops to lecture.
If a student does not own a laptop for financial reasons the program provides them with one to follow along. Programs such as TopHat create a positive learning environment for all students and enhance the students’ abilities to clearly understand what is being taught. Electronics also supply students with quick access to the internet where a student can follow along with a PowerPoint on their own monitor, while also searching anything they may need clarification on. A student can quickly google words or phrases they may not understand if they feel uncomfortable asking in lecture.
Despite these advantages, laptops can also cause distractions. While in lecture many students have a bad habit of checking Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, disregarding how distracting this can be for others. This is also detrimental for the person using social media, as it is nearly impossible to browse Facebook while focusing on lecture as well. To reduce the negative impact of laptops rules can be put in place to minimize distractions. For example, students who want to bring laptops can sit at the back of the lecture hall to avoid disturbing others. Additionally, laptops can be banned from tutorials so that more students are able to fully pay attention to what is being discussed. Professors can also try to supply programs like ‘TopHat” where the lecture becomes more interactive, encouraging the student to pay attention rather than browse social media.
It is also important that we accommodate electronics in lecture as they can make material more accessible for students with disabilities.
For example, Pear Note on MacBooks and One Note on PCs allows students with processing disabilities to synchronize information by recording lectures while taking notes. The student can then go through their notes, highlight a concept they didn’t understand in the lecture, and the software repeats the material from that point in time. This helps to increase comprehension and the quality of notes. If laptops were to be banned entirely with the exception of students with disabilities, then they could be uncomfortably singled out.
The use of electronics in the classroom can have both negative and positive effects. To eliminate the negatives professors should consider if the course requires electronics or if the material is largely verbal or written. Professors should also consider how their decisions affect students with disabilities and decide on the most appropriate way to accommodate them, creating a positive environment for all students. Through my own experience I find that the use of electronics can be extremely helpful, as it provides access to all lecture material that you can follow while listening to the lecturer. While I do believe that laptops are a distraction, I do not believe they should be banned because the positives outweigh the negatives.
Photo Credit: Brett Jordan
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
