结构化还是半结构化?在二语学术写作语境下,反思期刊在研究生生成式人工智能素养培养中的应用

IF 3.6 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Danyang Zhang, Lanyu Wen, Junjie Gavin Wu
{"title":"结构化还是半结构化?在二语学术写作语境下,反思期刊在研究生生成式人工智能素养培养中的应用","authors":"Danyang Zhang,&nbsp;Lanyu Wen,&nbsp;Junjie Gavin Wu","doi":"10.1111/ejed.70189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) not only has the potential to aid L2 academic writing but also poses unique challenges concerning impacts and ethics. Reflection journals, which promote critical thinking and metacognitive awareness, have the capacity to guide GenAI-assisted writing, yet remain underexplored. This study examines and compares the effects of structured reflection journals (SRJs) and semi-structured reflection journals (SSRJs) on enhancing postgraduates' GenAI literacy within an L2 academic writing context. Based on the frameworks proposed by UNESCO and Digital Promise, the study developed a GenAI literacy framework that includes four dimensions: (a) <i>Operational Competence in GenAI Tools</i>, (b) <i>Ethics and Security in GenAI Usage</i>, (c) <i>Critical Evaluation of GenAI Outputs and Autonomy</i> and (d) <i>Reflection in GenAI Application</i>. The study assessed the GenAI literacy levels of 39 participants before and after four GenAI-assisted writing tasks. Reflection journals were completed after each task (20 in the SRJ group and 19 in the SSRJ group). Results revealed significant improvements in GenAI literacy across three dimensions (Dimensions 1 to 3), with no significant difference between the SRJ and SSRJ groups. However, thematic analysis of reflective content showed that SRJs, with their more comprehensive guiding questions, encouraged deeper engagement with GenAI-related rules and more thorough evaluations of GenAI-generated content compared to SSRJs. By comparing different types of reflection journals as effective scaffolds in L2 writing pedagogy, this study encourages the integration of reflective practices into GenAI-assisted L2 academic writing classrooms, aiming to enhance students' critical evaluation skills and ethical awareness.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47585,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Education","volume":"60 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Structured or Semi-Structured? The Use of Reflection Journals in Postgraduates' Generative Artificial Intelligence Literacy Development in an L2 Academic Writing Context\",\"authors\":\"Danyang Zhang,&nbsp;Lanyu Wen,&nbsp;Junjie Gavin Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ejed.70189\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) not only has the potential to aid L2 academic writing but also poses unique challenges concerning impacts and ethics. Reflection journals, which promote critical thinking and metacognitive awareness, have the capacity to guide GenAI-assisted writing, yet remain underexplored. This study examines and compares the effects of structured reflection journals (SRJs) and semi-structured reflection journals (SSRJs) on enhancing postgraduates' GenAI literacy within an L2 academic writing context. Based on the frameworks proposed by UNESCO and Digital Promise, the study developed a GenAI literacy framework that includes four dimensions: (a) <i>Operational Competence in GenAI Tools</i>, (b) <i>Ethics and Security in GenAI Usage</i>, (c) <i>Critical Evaluation of GenAI Outputs and Autonomy</i> and (d) <i>Reflection in GenAI Application</i>. The study assessed the GenAI literacy levels of 39 participants before and after four GenAI-assisted writing tasks. Reflection journals were completed after each task (20 in the SRJ group and 19 in the SSRJ group). Results revealed significant improvements in GenAI literacy across three dimensions (Dimensions 1 to 3), with no significant difference between the SRJ and SSRJ groups. However, thematic analysis of reflective content showed that SRJs, with their more comprehensive guiding questions, encouraged deeper engagement with GenAI-related rules and more thorough evaluations of GenAI-generated content compared to SSRJs. By comparing different types of reflection journals as effective scaffolds in L2 writing pedagogy, this study encourages the integration of reflective practices into GenAI-assisted L2 academic writing classrooms, aiming to enhance students' critical evaluation skills and ethical awareness.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47585,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Education\",\"volume\":\"60 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.70189\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.70189","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生成式人工智能(GenAI)不仅具有帮助第二语言学术写作的潜力,而且在影响和伦理方面提出了独特的挑战。促进批判性思维和元认知意识的反思期刊有能力指导基因人工智能辅助写作,但仍未得到充分开发。本研究考察并比较了结构化反思期刊(srj)和半结构化反思期刊(SSRJs)在二语学术写作背景下对提高研究生基因素养的影响。基于教科文组织和数字承诺提出的框架,该研究开发了一个基因人工智能素养框架,其中包括四个方面:(a)基因人工智能工具的操作能力,(b)基因人工智能使用中的伦理和安全,(c)基因人工智能产出和自主性的批判性评估,以及(d)基因人工智能应用中的反思。该研究评估了39名参与者在完成四项基因人工智能辅助写作任务前后的基因人工智能读写水平。每项任务完成后完成反思日志(SRJ组20例,SSRJ组19例)。结果显示,基因读写能力在三个维度(维度1至维度3)上有显著提高,SRJ组和SSRJ组之间没有显著差异。然而,对反思性内容的专题分析表明,与ssrj相比,srj的指导性问题更全面,鼓励更深入地参与genai相关规则,并对genai生成的内容进行更彻底的评估。通过比较不同类型的反思性期刊作为第二语言写作教学的有效框架,本研究鼓励将反思性实践融入genai辅助的第二语言学术写作课堂,旨在提高学生的批判性评价技能和道德意识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Structured or Semi-Structured? The Use of Reflection Journals in Postgraduates' Generative Artificial Intelligence Literacy Development in an L2 Academic Writing Context

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) not only has the potential to aid L2 academic writing but also poses unique challenges concerning impacts and ethics. Reflection journals, which promote critical thinking and metacognitive awareness, have the capacity to guide GenAI-assisted writing, yet remain underexplored. This study examines and compares the effects of structured reflection journals (SRJs) and semi-structured reflection journals (SSRJs) on enhancing postgraduates' GenAI literacy within an L2 academic writing context. Based on the frameworks proposed by UNESCO and Digital Promise, the study developed a GenAI literacy framework that includes four dimensions: (a) Operational Competence in GenAI Tools, (b) Ethics and Security in GenAI Usage, (c) Critical Evaluation of GenAI Outputs and Autonomy and (d) Reflection in GenAI Application. The study assessed the GenAI literacy levels of 39 participants before and after four GenAI-assisted writing tasks. Reflection journals were completed after each task (20 in the SRJ group and 19 in the SSRJ group). Results revealed significant improvements in GenAI literacy across three dimensions (Dimensions 1 to 3), with no significant difference between the SRJ and SSRJ groups. However, thematic analysis of reflective content showed that SRJs, with their more comprehensive guiding questions, encouraged deeper engagement with GenAI-related rules and more thorough evaluations of GenAI-generated content compared to SSRJs. By comparing different types of reflection journals as effective scaffolds in L2 writing pedagogy, this study encourages the integration of reflective practices into GenAI-assisted L2 academic writing classrooms, aiming to enhance students' critical evaluation skills and ethical awareness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Education
European Journal of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: The prime aims of the European Journal of Education are: - To examine, compare and assess education policies, trends, reforms and programmes of European countries in an international perspective - To disseminate policy debates and research results to a wide audience of academics, researchers, practitioners and students of education sciences - To contribute to the policy debate at the national and European level by providing European administrators and policy-makers in international organisations, national and local governments with comparative and up-to-date material centred on specific themes of common interest.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信