Dead Ideas in Teaching and Learning

Are Students Knowledge Consumers or Co-Producers? A discussion on academic co-creation with Robert Gray

In this episode, we sit down with Dr. Robert Gray, Associate Professor of University Pedagogy at the University of Bergen in Norway, to explore a fundamental question about the purpose of higher education: should learning be an act of consumption or production? Maybe the best learning experiences don't simply ask students to absorb information—they invite students to actively re-write and co-create knowledge with the teacher.Dr. Gray's research draws on Roland Barthes' concepts of "readerly" and "writerly" texts, arguing that valuable learning happens when students are encouraged to "re-write" their classroom materials and become active producers of meaning. We discuss how students bring diverse perspectives and contexts to shared texts and lectures, creating something new and innovative from the materials we provide. As educators, we are challenged to foster an active, collaborative campus culture where learning becomes genuinely additive and co-creative.Learn more about Dr. Gray’s research in his article: “Learning Is [Like] an Act of Writing: The Writerly Turn in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education”Other materials referenced in this episode include:Barthes, R. (1975). The pleasure of the text (R. Miller, Trans.). Hill and Wang. (Original work published 1973).

“Constitutively Irresponsible”: Why Students Can't Be GenAI's Quality Control. A conversation with Gene Flenady and Robert Sparrow.

This week, we have two guests on the podcast. We’re joined by Gene Flenady, Lecturer in Philosophy at Monash University, whose research concerns the structure and social conditions of human rational agency, including the implications of new technologies for meaningful work and tertiary pedagogy. Our second guest is Robert Sparrow, Professor of Philosophy at Monash University. His research interests include political philosophy and the ethics of science and technology with an eye towards real-world applications. Flenady and Sparrow argue that GenAI systems are "constitutively irresponsible" because their algorithms are designed to predict what "sounds good" - not necessarily what is true or contextually appropriate. Our guests suggest that it's unfair to expect learners themselves to determine when AI is wrong or misleading. Doing so puts students in an impossible position and gets in the way of building meaningful relationships with their human teachers and the pursuit of lifelong learning. Learn more about Drs. Flenady and Sparrow’s work in their article: “Cut the bullshit: why GenAI systems are neither collaborators nor tutors”Other materials referenced in this episode include:Frankfurt, H. G. (2005). On bullshit. Princeton University Press.

Redefining Academic Integrity in the Age of AI with Phill Dawson

In this episode, we talk with Dr. Phill Dawson about how and why college students “cheat.” Phillip (Phill) Dawson is the Co-Director of the Centre for Research in Assessment and Digital Learning (CRADLE) at Deakin University. His research focuses on cheating, AI teaching assessments, and academic feedback tools. What counts as cheating? How does cheating shortchange students in their learning journeys and professional development? And perhaps most pressingly, how is AI changing our definition of “cheating” in higher education? Tune in to hear our thoughts on these and other questions in our conversation with Dr. Dawson. 

880 Eyeballs: Mastering Active Learning in Large Classes with Justin Shaffer

Can you truly engage students in active learning when facing hundreds of faces in a lecture hall? We explore this challenge with Justin Shaffer, Founder of Recombinant Education, Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies, and Teaching Professor in Chemical and Biological Engineering and Quantitative Biosciences and Engineering at the Colorado School of Mines.Dr. Shaffer shares insights on managing the intensity of teaching to "880 eyeballs" and reveals how highly structured course design transforms large classroom experiences. Together, we examine backwards design principles, effective assessment techniques, and practical classroom activities that enable educators to foster deeper student learning, even at scale.Learn more about Dr. Shaffer’s work in his publication - High Structure Course Design.Other materials referenced in this episode include:S. Freeman, S.L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M.K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, & M.P. Wenderoth, Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111 (23) 8410-8415, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111 (2014).E.J. Theobald, M.J. Hill, E. Tran, S. Agrawal, E.N. Arroyo, S. Behling, N. Chambwe, D.L. Cintrón, J.D. Cooper, G. Dunster, J.A. Grummer, K. Hennessey, J. Hsiao, N. Iranon, L. Jones, H. Jordt, M. Keller, M.E. Lacey, C.E. Littlefield, A. Lowe, S. Newman, V. Okolo, S. Olroyd, B.R. Peecook, S.B. Pickett, D.L. Slager, I.W. Caviedes-Solis, K.E. Stanchak, V. Sundaravardan, C. Valdebenito, C.R. Williams, K. Zinsli, & S. Freeman, Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117 (12) 6476-6483, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117 (2020).M.T. Owens, S.B. Seidel, M. Wong, T.E. Bejines, S. Lietz, J.R. Perez, S. Sit, Z. Subedar, G.N. Acker, S.F. Akana, B. Balukjian, H.P. Benton, J.R. Blair, S.M. Boaz, K.E. Boyer, J.B. Bram, L.W. Burrus, D.T. Byrd, N. Caporale, E.J. Carpenter, Y.M. Chan, L. Chen, A. Chovnick, D.S. Chu, B.K. Clarkson, S.E. Cooper, C. Creech, K.D. Crow, J.R. de la Torre, W.F. Denetclaw, K.E. Duncan, A.S. Edwards, K.L. Erickson, M. Fuse, J.J. Gorga, B. Govindan, L.J. Green, P.Z. Hankamp, H.E. Harris, Z. He, S. Ingalls, P.D. Ingmire, J.R. Jacobs, M. Kamakea, R.R. Kimpo, J.D. Knight, S.K. Krause, L.E. Krueger, T.L. Light, L. Lund, L.M. Márquez-Magaña, B.K. McCarthy, L.J. McPheron, V.C. Miller-Sims, C.A. Moffatt, P.C. Muick, P.H. Nagami, G.L. Nusse, K.M. Okimura, S.G. Pasion, R. Patterson, P.S. Pennings, B. Riggs, J. Romeo, S.W. Roy, T. Russo-Tait, L.M. Schultheis, L. Sengupta, R. Small, G.S. Spicer, J.H. Stillman, A. Swei, J.M. Wade, S.B. Waters, S.L. Weinstein, J.K. Willsie, D.W. Wright, C.D. Harrison, L.A. Kelley, G. Trujillo, C.R. Domingo, J.N. Schinske, & K.D. Tanner, Classroom sound can be used to classify teaching practices in college science courses, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 114 (12) 3085-3090, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1618693114 (2017).A.M. Hermundstad, D.S. Bassett, K.S. Brown, E.M. Aminoff, D. Clewett, S. Freeman, A. Frithsen, A. Johnson, C.M. Tipper, M.B. Miller, S.T. Grafton, & J.M. Carlson, Structural foundations of resting-state and task-based functional connectivity in the human brain, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110 (15) 6169-6174, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1219562110 (2013).

The Secret to a Connected Classroom? Names Matter. A Discussion with Michelle Miller

Welcome to Season 10! In our opening episode, we sit down with Dr. Michelle Miller—Professor of Psychological Sciences and President’s Distinguished Teaching Fellow at Northern Arizona University—to explore the simple yet powerful practice of learning students’ names. Drawing upon her research in memory, attention, and the impact of technology on learning, Dr. Miller shares how addressing students by name fosters belonging and community in the classroom. We also discuss the practical challenges faculty face in remembering so many new names and faces. Together, we review practical strategies to strengthen memory and build instructor confidence in this vital classroom practice.Learn more about Dr. Miller’s work in her publication - Minds Online: Teaching Effectively with Technology.