I am still trying to figure out ways to use GenAI to enhance instruction, not just as a “faster google” like some students described it to me, but in a way to really support learning. So I have been playing with Claude as a personal instructor for a couple of days. And I like it!
I asked Claude to have conversations with me with the purpose of giving me opportunities to practise my Swedish. After a couple of days, I asked Claude to summarise what we have been doing:
“In our interaction, we have worked together to improve your Swedish skills through a dynamic and interactive process. You have formulated sentences and asked questions in Swedish, giving you the opportunity to practice expressing complex thoughts and ideas. In turn, I have provided immediate feedback, corrected grammar and spelling, and explained nuances in language usage. Our dialogue has covered various topics, from everyday situations to more specialised discussions about your work in academic development. This has allowed you to expand your vocabulary and practice using Swedish in different contexts. Through this process, you have received continuous practice and feedback, which is crucial for language learning. At the same time, you have been able to reflect on the potential for GenAI in teaching, which ties into your professional interest as an academic developer.”
And I agree, we are having interesting conversations, both when it comes to language learning but also for my professional life!
Regarding practising my Swedish with Claude, Claude picked up on Norwegian influences in the first message I wrote already, and pointed out where I was using Norwegian words or spelling in subsequent messages (which I have been trying to get the Swedish teacher to do, or to find a mentor for, both without success). We also discussed differences between Norway and Sweden beyond language, for example that here in Sweden, cheese slicers tend to have a straight cutting edge, whereas in Norway they tend to have a wavy one. Thanks for generalising that observation that I made when I moved here!
When it comes to academic development, we discussed, for example, how GenAI could be used in technical subjects, not just as a tool that gives “correct” responses or helps in that way, but in a way similar to how it is challenging and correcting me. Here, Claude suggested several interesting options and gave examples:
Claude suggested some prompt strategies for students to create good discussions:
An example prompt that Claude provided:
“Act as an interactive study assistant in [specific technical subject]. Use the Socratic method to guide me through concepts and problem-solving. Adapt to my knowledge level and gradually increase the difficulty. Ask questions that encourage me to explain my reasoning and correct any misunderstandings in a constructive manner. Also, help me see how the knowledge can be applied in practical situations.”
I think working like this is super helpful and fun. And even without explicit instruction, the tone of the outputs was always encouraging and friendly, and made me want to continue the conversation, even though I had to put in effort (a lot at times). I can see that this use could be super useful for students, too!
One point I am thinking about a lot though is what does it mean for us as teachers when GenAI tools are perceived so positive, encouraging, and ultimately also trustworthy. And when it is also always available, day and night, never gets annoyed or is too busy to answer, and doesn’t potentially make people feel embarrassed for asking stupid questions or making stupid mistakes. Why would anyone still seek out interactions with teachers, how does it change our role, or maybe better, how should we reinterpret our role, to use GenAI to really enhance our instruction and student learning?