Thanks Yurgos!

Well done, Ian. Amazing.

Thanks! I feel like I should have figured that out 🤦‍♂️

I feel that we inevitably do assess some different things with a for learning lens because feedback gives us a chance to say more things we care about. But I am wondering, philosophically, perhaps, if it is possible to assess some things "for learning" that are impossible to assess "of learning"

This probably means you are doing it right. Sorry.

The awful truth is you don't actually find the right themes, you just stop at some point and go with the ones you have at that point. And then those might even change as you "write it up". But what you are doing right now, that's the process (IMO)

Raspberries cost about $2 per second at my house.

The panellists challenged us to slow down, think relationally, and critically examine the systems shaping education. From risks of homogenisation to the importance of sovereignty and refusal, Tristan and Tamika offered thoughts about how institutions might navigate AI ethically and inclusively.

To me, all of this points to the need for educators to be trying to figure out this evolving educational context with students. Supportive, careful exploration and critique. I don't think extremes of resistance or adoption will help students where they are at. But that's up for debate!

We also have focus group papers in the pipeline, looking at how students are thinking about GenAI, their questions and positions. Complex, diverse, entangled in rich conditions, contexts and beliefs, is what we're seeing. A lot of them are using GenAI even as they are worried about using it.

...Students were concerned about GenAI feedback reliability + contextual / disciplinary expertise and valued relational aspect of teacher feedback.

GenAI / teacher feedback serve different functions. It's not either/or.

2024 was a busy year, I'm pretty sure I've forgotten a bunch of things I did.

It's a good paper, you should be proud.

D'oh, wrong James Lamb! Sorry to both Jameses.

So far, I have thought about the following:
- apprenticeship
- lab work
- collaborative projects where educator is part of the group
- supervised practice
- co-authoring with students
- peer-led teaching sessions
- coaching (where coach has to collaborate with student, as in tennis)

In terms of declarations made in advance of an outcome, the best we can say is that something is "a likely solution", taking into account the people, context and the conditions we believe to be in play.

It might not always solve all related problems. Which means it is only a solution to the problems it has already solved (rather than future, related problems) and it is probably a contingent solution, reliant on other factors.

If it has solved a problem, it's probably in combination with other forces and influencing factors, in conditions conducive to the outcome that happened.

And it's not inherently authentic, either.