(Nie)sprawiedliwe narzędzia – pisanie bluszczowe

A. Cywiński
{"title":"(Nie)sprawiedliwe narzędzia – pisanie bluszczowe","authors":"A. Cywiński","doi":"10.15290/parezja.2021.16.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The text presents an autoethnographic response to the results of a survey in which academics were asked about their sense of justice regarding the tools offered by universities during the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis of 118 responses and their justifications indicates that for 77% of them the tools proposed during the COVID-19 epidemic are fair and for 23% – unfair. In addition, respondents questioned the validity of the question of fairness with regard to digital tools. On the basis of autoethnography, the above result is a catalyst for reflecting on the author’s ideas about the research topic and the relationship of people with artificial intelligence (AI). As a result of the conducted analysis, it is postulated that the dichotomy “fair/unfair” be used in relation to digital tools used in education.","PeriodicalId":212600,"journal":{"name":"Parezja Czasopismo Forum Młodych Pedagogów przy Komitecie Nauk Pedagogicznych PAN","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parezja Czasopismo Forum Młodych Pedagogów przy Komitecie Nauk Pedagogicznych PAN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15290/parezja.2021.16.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The text presents an autoethnographic response to the results of a survey in which academics were asked about their sense of justice regarding the tools offered by universities during the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis of 118 responses and their justifications indicates that for 77% of them the tools proposed during the COVID-19 epidemic are fair and for 23% – unfair. In addition, respondents questioned the validity of the question of fairness with regard to digital tools. On the basis of autoethnography, the above result is a catalyst for reflecting on the author’s ideas about the research topic and the relationship of people with artificial intelligence (AI). As a result of the conducted analysis, it is postulated that the dichotomy “fair/unfair” be used in relation to digital tools used in education.
在一项调查中,学者们被问及他们对2019冠状病毒病大流行期间大学提供的工具的正义感,本文对调查结果进行了自我民族学回应。对118份答复及其理由的分析表明,在COVID-19流行期间提出的工具中,77%是公平的,23%是不公平的。此外,受访者对数字工具公平性问题的有效性提出了质疑。在自我民族志的基础上,上述结果是反思作者对研究课题的看法以及人与人工智能(AI)关系的催化剂。作为所进行的分析的结果,假设在与教育中使用的数字工具有关的问题上使用“公平/不公平”的二分法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信