All students across the globe want to reach academic success and apply their knowledge in their lives and jobs. After reading Yang Mien-chieh and Jonathan Chin’s article titled “2,527 students enroll in MOE’s AI programs,” which was published on the Taipei Times’ page 3 on Friday last week, and the research article Reimagining education: Bridging artificial intelligence, transhumanism, and critical pedagogy by researchers Funda Nayir, Tamer Sari and Aras Bozkurt, I have come to the conclusion that generative artificial intelligence (AI) is quite useful when it comes to helping students in their learning endeavors. Nevertheless, every tool that human beings have created comes with threats and opportunities.
The researchers said that generative AI raises worries that automation would result in job losses and difficulties such as incorrect judgements and prejudices. Nevertheless, generative AI might be a handy tool when it is used for educational purposes under the guidance of a teacher.
Teachers who are not yet familiar with generative AI tools can still show the basic steps to their students. As National Changhua Senior High School has opened a class teaching students how to use generative AI to conduct research and prepare for a debate, with an emphasis on developing the ability to critically assess information produced by algorithms, other teachers can follow suit and encourage their students to conduct research using AI. Using AI tools is not about students becoming lazy by giving them all the answers on a silver plate. On the contrary, it is about helping students finding new and original information.
The advantages of using generative AI are that students would find out that writing a research article is not as time consuming nor painstaking anymore, and that they can save time and do other important duties. That is to say, teachers need to show their students that generative AI tools can facilitate the research process and scaffold learning by doing more in-depth investigations to verify information and sources if needed.
According to educator Edgar Dale’s Cone of Experience, students need to have learning experiences that simulate “doing the real thing” and “are more effective than traditional methodologies.” Therefore, students who decide to enroll in a class need to show industriousness, which is a cornerstone of the Pyramid of Success. Industriousness consists of hard work and planning to reach a goal, both of which are needed for positive performance behavior. Intentness also consists of being determined and persistent. When students are using their “strengths,” they tend to become alive, and more communicative and excited about what they are doing.
When implemented properly, AI could serve as a beneficial assistive technology in education, allowing students to achieve their full potential or easing many educational processes.
David Blasco is a Ling Tung University assistant professor.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS