Mirjam Sophia Glessmer

Haha, co-creating not just the teacher and GenAI, but the teacher with the students AND with GenAI!

In their study, Hingle & Johri (2026) describe a 4-week module in a course on a related topic, in which students first learn about how GenAI works both technically and in society.

Bryant (2026) starts from the premise that “the decline of trust in institutions is the real existential threat for teaching and learning“. Trust in institutions, they say, has been declining for a while, but this has intensified with the availability of GenAI, and the imperfect way in which both teachers, students, and institutions react to […]

One of the seemingly most promising responses to GenAI being misused in assessment situations has been to (try to) physically exclude technology by creating assessment situations where the assessor observes what the student is doing (like in face-to-face oral or proctored assessments). But what if accessing GenAI does not require a computer or phone, but […]

Today, Robert Kordts is presenting our poster “Sustainability is Everybody’s Business” at the CHARM-EU Annual Conference in Turku.

In Kestin et al. (2025), discussed in yesterday’s iEarth journal club (pity I missed the discussion!), an “AI-powered tutor” is compared against an active learning class, and they find that “students learn significantly more in less time when using the AI tutor, compared with the in-class active learning. They also feel more engaged and more motivated“. […]

We often equate a university with its physical campus, despite the experiences during covid-19, or, as discussed in Suchikova et al. (2026), the relocation of more than 40 universities in Ukraine since 2014. They suggest understanding universities “as a network of relationships, practices, and shared intellectual commitments” and discuss the “university without walls” model, “in […]

This is a question that many teachers ponder, and here we have an answer. In a nutshell: students are often very strategic in their decision to (not) attend!

Quick summaries of three articles on assessment that have been sitting in tabs in my browser for too long. There are more, but it’s Saturday!

“Efficiency demands that we work smarter and not harder, but is this better for our wellbeing?” That’s the question that Campbell et al. (2025) investigate in their study, and they give away the answer pretty much directly: no, since the article is called “experimental evidence that exerting effort increases meaning“.

I had not come across the term “attention sanctuaries” before, but somehow it spoke to me. There are so many things constantly competing for attention and I often find it difficult to resist the emails that would just take a minute (or five) to respond to, the article I could quickly read, the podcast I […]

To understand why teachers start professionalising in teaching, Bonnevier et al. (2026) analyse critical incidents in teaching. They find that teaching is overwhelmingly perceived as an individual venture where teachers feel left alone with heavy personal responsibilities, and identify four sub themes:

Restarting my daily “Stories of Hope” reading practice! Starting with the part of the book that allegedly “underscores that there is hope, through community and co-creation“. I hope it delivers, that’s what I need today!

During February this year, I had a phase of reading about the “tyranny of participation“, and this morning on the bus I read the super interesting article “Beyond participation: reimagining silence as pedagogical presence in the university seminar” by Hope (2026), in which she reinterprets silence from a lack of participation to forms of participation […]

I like the “trial by hire” title! And the whole article is fun to read. It’s a bit similar to Kugel (1993)’s “how professors develop as teachers”, in that Post (2011) describes a typical development as a teacher through stages based on a few interviews and a phenomenological approach:

In this very cool project, 8 student researchers interviewed students and staff from 4 different institutions about trust and partnership under the overarching goal of exploring how to strengthen student voice.

What caught my eye about this article was that Bearman et al. (2026) write that “students prioritise their developing values and moral positions over institutional messaging“. Sounds intriguing, and somehow inspires hope in the future, doesn’t it?

This is a really interesting article where Farini (2012) analyses videos of interactions to find trust-building activities that educators do in peace education to build trust between groups of adolescents from different countries.

I talk a lot with teachers about co-creation of learning and teaching, and my own experience matches perfectly what Murphy et al. (2017) describe: “The overarching response was a positive statement followed first with a “but” and then with the issues that could be caused by a partnership approach“.

This is a really cool study: At LU, students have the opportunity to be drawn in a lottery that gives them a spot in the waiting list for affordable student housing — just by the luck of draw, independent of parental income, prior performance, or other factors that might make interpretation of the data difficult. […]