Discussion

Feedback Paper 1

Good start. Take a look at the Example Paper's conclusion paragraph. Notice how they transition from the body to the conclusion while also briefly previewing the study as well as including the hypothesis.

1

Motivational Factors in Adherence to Educational Technology Policies

Despite the fact that we live in a dynamic era of educational technology where policy changes overshadow everything, institutions are adapting to these changing realities by amending their previously adopted policies, which have received mixed reactions from students who either seek to adopt enthusiastically or vehemently resist. This study critically examines the psychology underlying individual adherence, seeking to reveal the motivational forces steering the course of compliance or rebellion. With the impending integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in education, particularly the proposed AI policy for Fall 2024 at FIU, it becomes important to understand how people react in such situations. Based on Psychological Reactance Theory, this literature review examines the relationship between perceived freedom, motivation and policy compliance.

Chan (2023) highlights ten essential elements of responsible AI practices that can be incorporated into higher education The study focuses on aspects like reassessing assessments, developing holistic competencies, and addressing privacy risks. In accordance with the literature review's emphasis on motivational factors related to policy adherence, Chan’s study offers some practical insights on how students’ motivations can influence their attitudes towards changes in the technology policies concerning AI integration. In general, it enhances the study of psychological aspects in students' perceptions about policy changes.

The study by Thomas K. F. Chiu (2023) explores the impact of Generative AI (GenAI), specifically ChatGPT and Midjourney, on educational practices, policies, and research directions. The findings reveal significant shifts in teacher and student perspectives on learning outcomes, assessment approaches, teacher skills, and administrative tasks. Importantly, the study identifies key themes such as changes in student learning, teacher development, assessment methods, and administrative work. These insights are crucial for understanding the evolving landscape of education. They can contribute to shaping policies related to the integration of AI in educational settings, aligning with the broader context of educational technology policies.

The literature review highlights the significance of responsible AI integration in higher education, drawing practical insights from Chan's study on critical areas and transformative shifts in education practices and policies in Chiu's study on the impact of Generative AI, collectively underpinning Psychological Reactance Theory among student responses to imminent incorporation of AI.

References

Chan, C. K. Y. (2023). A comprehensive AI policy education framework for university teaching and learning.  International journal of educational technology in higher education,  20(1), 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00408-3

Thomas K. F. Chiu (04 Sep 2023): The impact of Generative AI (GenAI) on practices, policies and research direction in education: a case of ChatGPT and Midjourney, Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2253861

4

Psychological Reactance

Psychological Reactance Theory

The education sector has been evolving at a very fast rate, and the recent application of artificial intelligence in the sector has come with a raft of policies that will oversee its use. Institutions are adapting to the changes by amending their previously adopted policies, which have received mixed reactions from students who either seek to adopt enthusiastically or vehemently resist. Based on the Psychological Reactance Theory, this study critically examines the psychology underlying individual adherence, seeking to reveal the motivational forces steering the course of compliance or rebellion. With the impending integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in education, particularly the proposed AI policy for Fall 2024 at FIU, it becomes essential to understand how people react in such situations. This paper aims to extract valuable insights from existing literature to inform and support the hypotheses that will shape our study in the weeks to come.

The first one is a study by Ma and Miller (2022), which examined the repercussions of controlling language, fear, and disgust appeals on individuals' responses to COVID-19 vaccination messages, rooted in Psychological Reactance Theory (PRT). Participants experienced varying combinations of these variables, and their reactions were measured after each message. The findings unveiled those heightened levels of controlling language, fear appeals, or disgust appeals resulted in diminished persuasion, fostering increased perceptions of freedom threat, reactance, source derogation, and less positive attitudes toward the messages. Significantly, the study contributes to our understanding of how controlling language, characterized by forceful imperatives, induces freedom-threatening reactions, aligning with our hypothesis. This underscores the pivotal role of language in health messages, which is crucial for anticipating public responses, especially in the context of imminent AI integration in education.

Another insightful study is Rui et al.'s (2023) study, which examined the cultural complexities of psychological reactance by examining the impact of power distance on reactions to anti-smoking messages in China and the United States. The participants, consisting of 400 Chinese and 441 Americans, were exposed to messages with and without controlling language. The study measured negative cognitive thoughts, anger, and state reactance as dependent variables. The findings revealed that individuals, particularly Americans, reacted more negatively to controlling language, reporting increased anger. This adverse reaction suggests that the use of controlling language in persuasive messages may trigger emotional responses, potentially diminishing the effectiveness of such communication strategies. The study further demonstrated that the country difference in state reactance was mediated through trait reactance and power distance, providing insightful support for our hypothesis.

As the education sector undergoes a transformative phase with the integration of artificial intelligence, several changes are projected to take place regulation-wise. This study utilizes insights from Ma and Miller's (2022) investigation into controlling language effects and Rui et al.'s (2023) exploration of cultural influences on psychological reactance. Examining FIU's upcoming AI policy, the research, informed by Psychological Reactance Theory, hypothesizes that compliance-commanding language will induce heightened freedom threat perceptions and psychological reactance.

References

Ma, H., & Miller, C. (2022). “I Felt Completely Turned off by the Message”: The Effects of Controlling Language, Fear, and Disgust Appeals on Responses to COVID-19 Vaccination Messages.  Journal of Health Communication,  27(6), 427-438. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2022.2119311

Rui, J. R., Chen, J., Wang, L., & Xu, P. (2023). Freedom as Right or Privilege? Comparing the Effect of Power Distance on Psychological Reactance Between China and the United States.  Health Communication, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2023.2212138

Papers I and II Feedback Assignment #6

Instructions: Your instructors work hard to give you some good feedback on your Papers I and II in this class. Answer the following questions with regard to Papers I and II and how you will use your instructor’s feedback to make sure Paper III is the best it can be! There are no correct answers, so we will grade your answers based on the depth of your understanding of the feedback and the extent to which strategies for using the feedback are realistic.

Note that there are no perfect papers right now, if ever! Even published papers could probably use a little revision. Thus, all students can improve their papers, even if they received a high grade! Further note that you cannot complete this short assignment and get the points unless you look over your graded Papers I and II. Finally, note that I am looking for 1 to 3 sentence answers for each of the following questions, but feel free to write more. Sometimes reflecting on your work (as these questions ask you to do) can help prompt you to think about ways to improve your papers (in terms of methods, writing, or APA formatting). (0.5points per question)

1). For Paper I and Paper II, where (and why!) did you lose the most points? For example, did you lose the most points based on writing quality, APA formatting, not fully describing the materials/articles, turning in the paper late, etc. Write a separate answer for Papers I and II.

2). What was the best piece of advice you received in your feedback in each paper, and what made this significant (or important) for you? What advice (if any) did you disagree with, and why?

3). What specifically will you do differently as you prepare to write Paper III? For example, will you visit your instructor’s office hours, make an appointment with the writing center, make sure you check “yes” to everything on the paper checklist, look over the example paper, or read aloud other elements of your paper to make sure the writing is smooth and easy to read, etc.? You can do multiple things, of course, but make sure to follow-through with your strategies!

4). If you could change one thing about your Paper I that would make it better, what would it be? How will you use that as you revise Paper I for Paper III? What about Paper II? How could you change Paper II to make it better for its inclusion in Paper III?

5). What connections should there be between the methods and results sections from Paper II? Sometimes students have no idea what I mean here, but keep in mind that there is a big connection between what you describe in the methods section and what you look at in the results section. Think about that connection.

6). Look carefully at your use of APA format for your in-text citations and references in Paper I (and Paper II you cited in that paper). Did you have any APA errors? If so, is there an error you seemed to make more than once? Are there any comments your grader made about your APA formatting that surprised you? What changes to you think are necessary as you revise your papers for Paper III? Write 1-2 sentences commenting on your analysis and/or what you intend to do with regard to APA formatting in future papers (e.g., “I will review the APA formatting powerpoint and make any changes as needed,” or “Everything seemed fine to me already” or “I’ll visit APA formatting websites like the Owl Purdue site to make sure my APA format is correct). 7). Now, carefully examine your papers for specific language/editing issues. I want you to focus on at least one to three writing issues that you are now aware of—either issues that your grader mentioned in your paper feedback on your previous papers and/or issues you know you struggle with.  Again, write a 1-2 sentence analysis that specifies what you looked for, what you found, and how you plan to make changes for those writing issues as you revise for future papers.

8). Before you turned in Paper I, you completed the “Read Aloud Assignment” where you read the first page of your paper to another person and received some feedback from them. I want you to do that again for a new section of either Paper I or Paper II. If you like, you can re-read the first page of your Paper I aloud again to see if the changes you made seem to improve the flow and content of that page, but I’d prefer you take a different section of your paper. Take notes on any changes you make while reading aloud. If you want, return to the Short Lab Assignment #4 instructions and ask your listener to once again give you rating feedback on this follow-up read aloud activity. Write 1-2 sentences about what you learned from doing this and the types of things you changed, if any (e.g., “I found missing words”; “I found typos”; “I realized some of my sentences were too long & wordy”; “I realized my paper is already perfect”; etc.).

9). I want you to give me some information into what it feels like writing papers for this course. Do you find writing for this course easy or hard? What would make it easier for you? What tools do you find most useful in the course (e.g. the example papers, the paper instructions, the grade rubrics, the paper checklists, the paper clinics, etc.). Can you think of any tools not already available that you think would be beneficial for either you or for future semesters?

10). Finally, do you have any specific questions about either language or APA format that you want to raise in class or ask me individually? List them here.  If not, say “None.”