Process Focus

Educators today are confronted with a challenge in addressing students' growing reliance on AI. In particular, educators teaching fundamental skills such as writing, communication, and computer programming feel powerless. Many students, fascinated with all the AI tools that excel at these basic skills, are inclined to use AI prematurely. In this short piece, I will introduce Process Feedback, an innovative educational tool designed to encourage students to engage in insightful writing or coding and to reflect on their work. Process Feedback is a resource for both students and educators. When students use its online editor to complete their work, it visually shows process-related details such as breaks taken during the writing or coding process, typing fluency, copy-paste events, time spent on each paragraph, time allocated to revision versus content creation, and other relevant information. The tool not only enables students to self-explore and self-learn from their processes but

Undergraduate students use ChatGPT massively. In the article “I am a student. You have no idea how much we are using ChatGPT.”, Owen K. Terry describes how undergraduate students rely largely on ChatGPT ( The Chronicles of Higher Education, 2023 ). Terry, an undergraduate student at Columbia University, suggests that if education systems are to continue teaching students how to think, they need to shift to AI-proof assignments like oral exams and in-class writing. Yes, many educators who are tired of facing plagiarism may agree that oral exams, also known as “viva” exams, can be the ultimate tool to force students to study. In fact, most universities and colleges in Asia, including top science and engineering schools, have oral exams included in their final assessments; however, only educators who have tried this understand how exhausting it can be. Interviewing every single student in a class, even if it is once a semester, is no joke. Despite these challenges, some educators have fo

The primary best practice in incorporating AI into education is to prioritize the roles of students, educators, and parents. Unlike many other domains where AI is applied, education focuses more on creating a social platform for transforming lives, making it crucial to place humans at the forefront. The AI policy report released by the US Department of Education in 2023 underscores this by highlighting the importance of the "people" element and advocates for using AI with "humans in the loop"  ( DoE Policy Report , 2023 ) . However, if humans are to remain central, we should consider using AI not with humans in the loop but with "AI in the loop." While "humans in the loop" implies that humans play a crucial role in AI-assisted decision-making, it could also suggest that AI makes decisions with humans providing feedback only, which may be more suitable for industrial applications. In education, we believe AI should be in the loop, not humans. In e

Different citation styles, such as APA and MLA, have provided guidelines on how to cite generative AI ( MLA style ). For students, however, it may not always be appropriate to cite AI in the same manner as we do in standard research articles. Typically, a citation is used to identify the original source of information and to give credit to individuals for their work. If AI tools like ChatGPT or Gemini are cited as standard websites, the purpose of the citation may not be fully realized because these tools are neither the original sources nor do they seek credit for their output. To address this issue, it is important to rethink why we ask students to cite sources. One reason is to develop their ability to research multiple sources, compare various ideas, critique them, and present their arguments with sufficient evidence. In essence, we want students to "show their work." If this is our objective, one effective approach is to ask students to provide a record of their interact