A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä

Generative AI highlights the contrast between students’ dualistic epistemic practices and teacher education learning objectives;



Tekijät: Härkki, Tellervo; Thorström, Tarmo; Leino, Miika; Vartiainen, Henriikka; Tedre, Matti

Kustantaja: Edith Cowan University

Julkaisuvuosi: 2025

Lehti: Australian Journal of Teacher Education

Artikkelin numero: 4

Vuosikerta: 50

Numero: 4

Aloitussivu: 59

Lopetussivu: 83

ISSN: 0313-5373

eISSN: 1835-517X

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14221/1835-517X.6925

Julkaisun avoimuus kirjaamishetkellä: Avoimesti saatavilla

Julkaisukanavan avoimuus : Kokonaan avoin julkaisukanava

Verkko-osoite: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol50/iss4/4/

Rinnakkaistallenteen osoite: https://research.utu.fi/converis/portal/detail/Publication/515963273

Rinnakkaistallennetun julkaisun versio: Kustantajan versio


Tiivistelmä
This study examines student teachers’ capabilities when adopting a generative AI system as a new cognitive tool. In our pedagogical intervention, students used ChatGPT 3.5 to support a small research task. Consistent with decades of research on higher education students’ epistemic positions, most students approached the knowledge-building task (and, respectively, ChatGPT) with dualistic epistemic practices. Notably, ChatGPT’s polished interface invites naïve dualistic interpretations. However, teacher education learning objectives and effective knowledge-building with generative AI tools require more sophisticated epistemic stances: understanding knowledge as contingent and context-bound and knowledge-building as an activity that requires validation. This suggests that the central challenge for teacher education is not generative AI per se but supporting students’ epistemic development so that they can use such tools responsibly.


Avainsanat:
cognitive tool, epistemic position, epistemological belief, generative AI; hybrid intelligence; Perry scheme

Ladattava julkaisu

This is an electronic reprint of the original article.
This reprint may differ from the original in pagination and typographic detail. Please cite the original version.

Julkaisussa olevat rahoitustiedot: 
Research was not funded.


Last updated on