Skip to main content

2025: ASCILITE 2025 Conference Companion Materials

 

 

 

Reviewed abstracts for posters, workshops, and symposia/panel sessions for the ASCILITE 2025 Conference.

S. Barker, S. Kelly, R. McInnes & S. Dinmore. (Eds.)

Future Focussed. Educating in an era of continuous change. Proceedings ASCILITE 2025. Adelaide 

Adelaide Convention Centre, Adelaide, Australia

November 30 - December 3 2025

ASCILITE2025 Conference Website https://eventstudio.eventsair.com/ascilite-2025

Published: 28 November 2025

ASCILITE Conference - Posters

  • Digital capabilities: Digital navigators in an era of continuous change

    Ann Yates, Louise Starkey, Allan Sylvester, Rebecca Mines

    The proliferation of digital tools and technology in the 21st Century university offers students flexibility in how and when they study, access to a range of scholarly resources, and tools to aid study and life as a student (Haleem al., 2022). However, flexibility and the choice of technologies can create complex challenges to navigate. Access to multiple contradictory digital tools to aid study can create too much choice, which requires adaptability, resilience and persistence to successfully navigate (Lahey, 2024). Students’ use of digital technologies to facilitate learning is a process of individual and distributed agency (Matusov et al., 2015) and there is a correlation between higher education success and students’ ability to adopt strategies to leverage the benefits of digital technology (Bond et al, 2018). But how do students acquire knowledge to become skilled digital navigators and thrive in rapid technological and societal changes? Digital capabilities needed for student success are unclear as research has focused on generic digital skills (Starkey, 2019) while strategic skills for learning in higher education are poorly defined (Sánchez-Caballé et al., 2020), particularly with AI and large learning models re-negotiating the student-technology dyad. This poster presents the findings of research that aimed to identify strategic digital capabilities that enable students to navigate course content. To explore this topic we used an interpretivist, qualitative paradigm to answer the question of how high-achieving undergraduate students’ access, curate, collate, synthesise, and use digital course content and tools for learning. We recruited 25 students from one University in New Zealand from deans lists or who self-identified as high achieving. Participants were from a range of subjects, Arts, Commerce, Law and Design, and data were gathered through interviews, focus groups and talanoa for Pasifika students. Ethical approval was granted by the University’s Human Ethics Committee. Participants shared strategies and provided insights which highlighted how successful students navigated digital course material in complex systems and changing landscapes. For example, digital tools such as Google Docs, OneNote and Notion allow for structure, creativity and quick searchability, and tools like Glean useful to generate transcriptions. ChatGPT was used as a conversational partner in lieu of peers “to bounce off ideas”, where the LLM was interrogated, challenged and disagreed with, to affirm their reflective practice. This poster presents a visual representation of how high-achieving undergraduate students navigate a plethora of digital tools (including AI) across four capability categories identified in the research: To create social connections To manage information To navigate the university systems To organise their learning. The findings can be used as a framework to empower future students to develop digital capabilities to navigate their undergraduate courses. These capabilities foster adaptability and persistence and support strong learning communities in both physical and virtual spaces.

  • AI meets AI: A systematic review of assessment innovation and academic integrity in the age of artificial intelligence

    Moh Farah, Alvedi Sabani, Dian Dewi, Putra Catyanadika

    The rise of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is prompting a fundamental review of assessment design and academic integrity in higher education. This systematic review synthesises insights from 50 peer-reviewed studies and policy documents to explore how GenAI is reshaping pedagogical practice, institutional policy, and integrity norms. Evidence reveals a broad transition toward authentic, process-based, and oral assessments, alongside increased use of hybrid human–AI feedback mechanisms. A growing emphasis on AI literacy for students and staff also signals a shift in pedagogical priorities. However, the review identifies persistent tensions, including ethical ambiguity, fragmented policy responses, and over-reliance on detection tools with limited effectiveness. A distinctive contribution of this study is the Stakeholder Relevance Matrix, which highlights how emerging practices in assessment innovation, feedback design, and policy clarity unequally affect students, educators, and institutions. This matrix surfaces disparities in responsibility, vulnerability, and agency, underscoring the need for inclusive and values-driven responses. The review calls for a move from reactive enforcement toward integrity-by-design approaches that embed ethical and pedagogical principles from the outset. It concludes with forward-looking propositions to guide institutional policy and future research, offering a roadmap for building resilient, equitable, and ethically grounded assessment systems in the age of GenAI.

  • Co-designing inclusive, accessible micro-credentials

    Megan Colbert, Laura Airey, Richard McInnes

    Micro-credentials are a flexible and responsive course type that meets the evolving demands of learners, industries, and higher education institutions (Department of Education, 2024; Department of Education, 2022). However, despite universities increasingly integrating micro-credentials into their credentialing ecosystems, formal and non-formal education still operate in a largely separate fashion (Oliver, 2019); in this system, micro-credential learners are often not afforded the same status, rights, or institutional support as traditional degree-seeking students. Although online learning has become more commonplace in recent years, accessibility issues are still frequently experienced by students (Briggs et al., 2024). Additionally, when accessible and inclusive practices are present, they often lack integration or are applied inconsistently (Bandalaria, 2020). These discrepancies undermine both the learner’s experience and the credibility of micro-credentials as a legitimate higher education pathway. As such, when designing micro-credentials, it is critical that clear processes for ensuring accessibility and inclusion are embedded from the outset (van Rooij & Zirkle, 2016). For accessibility and inclusion strategies to be implemented effectively during course development, they should be designed with an intersectional perspective and consideration for the diverse needs of learners (Australian Disability Clearinghouse on Education and Training, n.d.), guided by key frameworks such as Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (CAST, n.d.) and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) (World Wide Web Consortium, 2023), and supplemented by related frameworks such as Cognitive Accessibility (Le Cunff, 2024; Web Accessibility Initiative, 2024) and Multimedia Learning Theory (Mayer, 2017) alongside relevant pedagogical approaches such as inclusive teaching (Rossi, 2022), and andragogical strategies to support adult learners (Ramirez & Inga, 2022). In our work as educational designers, we co-develop micro-credentials for our traditional student cohort, for MOOC platforms, and custom credentials for clients, working closely with academic staff and industry subject matter experts as part of a collaborative course development process. Our approach builds upon foundational standards such as the Higher Education Standards Framework (TEQSA, 2022) and draws upon different areas of expertise, including the frameworks and practices identified above, to help us support the unique context and learner cohort of micro-credentials. Through balancing effective pedagogy with inclusive and accessible design we developed a cohesive, consistent approach to course development. Our approach included clear guidelines to uphold our principles of providing equitable access to education through making content accessible and inclusive for a diverse audience, whilst also benefiting all learners by making learning experiences more flexible, learner-centred, and engaging (Digital Learning Institute, n.d.). This case study demonstrates how rapid development of short courses can be undertaken with an inclusion-first approach to creating learning environments that cater to diverse needs, abilities, and backgrounds. We share practical principles and evidence-based strategies, in addition to how these principles were consistently applied in practice through examples of our work. Through shared, transparent practices, we will demonstrate how accessibility and inclusion-first approaches can be embedded in micro-credential design, in order to provide a practical approach that can be adopted by others to build more equitable micro-credentials and enhance the quality of learning for all.

  • Partnering for practice: Using the RISE learning framework to design digital learning with intent

    Heather Hotaling, Emma Knight, Kylie Butler

    The RISE learning framework was developed to address a persistent gap in online learning design: the disconnect between pedagogical theory and practice. While social constructivist principles emphasise active engagement, formative feedback and alignment, many digital courses continue to rely heavily on passive content delivery. RISE (Relevant, Interactive, Structured, Engaging) offers a practical, discipline-agnostic conceptual tool that supports academics and learning designers in co-creating purposeful, student-centred online learning experiences. Unlike traditional activity-type taxonomies, RISE clearly distinguishes between passive (acquisition) and active (application) tasks, emphasising alignment with learning outcomes and the integration of formative feedback. It promotes the inclusion of collaborative learning experiences, recognising the value of peer interaction in fostering engagement and supporting learning outcomes, and foregrounds authenticity by encouraging the design of learning that reflects professional practice and builds industry-relevant capabilities. This poster introduces the conceptual foundations and development of the RISE learning framework, explores its use in collaborative course design, and outlines our plan to evaluate its use through a structured survey capturing academic and learning designer perspectives. Findings from this evaluation will inform future refinements to the framework.

  • Visualising learning: A curriculum mapping dashboard for ophthalmology training

    Kshitiz Gyawali, Santosh Khanal, Shalini Purohit, Jorge Reyna

    This proof-of-concept study explores the feasibility and usability of an interactive curriculum mapping dashboard designed to support informed decision-making around ophthalmology trainee rotations. Developed using data from the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists’ eDiary (surgical logbook) and Curriculum Component Survey, the dashboard allows stakeholders including trainees, supervisors, training networks, and the college to visualise curriculum coverage and identify potential gaps in clinical learning across training sites. Two key datasets informed the project: (1) 2023–2024 eDiary data, selected due to improved completeness following the introduction of required minimum procedures, and (2) 2023 Curriculum Component Survey data, which captured the type (Observe, Assist, Perform) and frequency (Frequent, Moderate, Occasional) of curriculum exposure reported by training sites. Data were integrated and visualised using Microsoft Power BI, with dashboard prototypes tested by college staff, Fellows, and committee members. The results highlighted substantial variation in clinical exposure across training posts and demonstrated how dashboard filters could assist in aligning individual trainee needs with available learning opportunities. User feedback confirmed the dashboard’s value in supporting planning and transparency, while also emphasising the importance of data accuracy and quality to ensure trust and usability. Overall, this study demonstrates the potential of a curriculum mapping dashboard to enhance data-informed training decisions in specialty medical education.

  • GenAI Tinker Workshops: Developing confidence through guided experimentation

    Sam Doherty

    Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is rapidly reframing academic practice, yet staff confidence to harness its potential remains uneven. Many university staff indicate that a “lack of familiarity with the technology, uncertainty about its use, or a lack of time to engage, contributed to their reluctance to use AI tools for their work” (McDonald, 2024). Building this confidence demands accessible opportunities that honour diverse starting points, and courageous experimentation which normalises trial-and-error—two of the principles guiding the University of Newcastle’s GenAI response. Our GenAI Tinker Workshops operationalise these principles by offering low-stakes, experimentation-based experiences where educators co-explore AI tools, reflect on ethical dimensions and iterate on real teaching artefacts. Playful, informal learning environments may lower cognitive load and heighten curiosity by reducing the focus on serious workplace implications (O’Hara & Lo, 2025). Tinkering studios, for example, cultivate “permission to fail” that supports creativity and innovation (Henriksen, 2021). The informal, low-stakes format of the sessions promoted engagement, echoing Worth’s (2024) assertion that “AI playgrounds” backed by appropriate guidance can support learning. Responding to TEQSA’s call for structured capacity-building around GenAI (TEQSA, 2024), Learning Design & Teaching Innovation designed monthly Tinker Workshops capped at roughly ten participants. Each 60-minute session invited academics to “tinker” with tools like ChatGPT, NapkinAI Copilot, NotebookLM and Gamma to draft real artefacts (course plans, presentations, podcasts, images, etc) for use in their teaching activities. Facilitators guide the participants through a simple introductory activity and focus on identifying opportunities to promote discussion in the group. Evaluation of the workshops, through informal participant feedback and in-session observations, showed an appreciation for this approach. Participants reported increased confidence not only with the tools but with navigating rapid change more broadly, citing reduced anxiety and a stronger sense of community. Participants noted possible operational benefits identified by exposure to various AI tools (example comments – “this will save me so much time” and “That just took about 20 seconds, it would take me three days to do the same.”). They also developed insights beyond the immediate operational focus of the activity (example comments – “I’d never thought of structuring my course that way, it’s really clear” and “This has really helped me think about how I use images and graphics in my lectures.”). Further, the informal nature of the sessions, with facilitator positioned as fellow learner rather than expert instructor supported honest discussion and debate around the implications (both positive and negative) of GenAI (example comments – “it’s just good to be able to talk about this stuff, and know everyone is in the same boat” and “I kind of knew that not all AI is not bad, but have not had the time to learn more.”). End of session discussion is guided towards awareness of the fallibility of GenAI outputs, and the importance of human expertise in co-creating learning experiences with GenAI. By embedding accessible, iterative, low-stakes Tinker Workshops alongside more traditional GenAI initiatives, we aim to directly tackle the challenge of uneven confidence driven by unfamiliarity, uncertainty and limited time. The format normalises trial-and-error, scaffolds ethical reflection and focuses “AI playground” tinkering on real world use cases—delivering immediate efficiency gains while supporting consideration of broader pedagogical impacts. Participants report reduced anxiety, stronger professional community and increased confidence in decision making around the use of GenAI. In short, structured opportunities to experiment safely are building adaptable educators who can collaborate with AI responsibly, meeting TEQSA’s call for capability-building and strengthening resilient, human-centred learning.

  • Enhancing curriculum quality and academic readiness through Power BI and Automation

    Khamsum Kinley, Karine Cosgrove, John Bourke, Steven Booten

    In today's data-rich educational environment, the ability to leverage institutional data effectively for course quality assurance and curriculum oversight is critical. Research indicates that automation of data has been a longstanding feature of the education sector. Bhardwaj and Kumar (2025) found that institutions have adopted Robotic Process Automation (RPA) to enhance operational efficiency. Shaulska et al. (2021) demonstrate how Power BI can be used on the University management system to monitor, analyse, and improve the university’s value proposition through data visualization and business intelligence. Liu et al. (2023) argue that visualising Learning Management System (LMS) data helps educators better understand student engagement and learning behaviours and supports data-informed decision-making. From a learning design support perspective, this paper outlines a scalable, automated solution project that integrates Power BI, Python, Power Automate, and various data platforms to enable efficient and insightful academic decision-making. Drawing on data from institutional sources—including Canvas LMS, PeopleSoft, and Microsoft suites—this approach generates interactive dashboards that streamline course reviews and site management. Custom Python scripts (similar to Vashisht et al., 2021) retrieve and process LMS data, while Power Automate facilitates real-time data collection from Microsoft Forms and other sources. This data is processed and visualised in Power BI to support curriculum and learning design operations. Two key outputs are presented: Course Review Dashboard – Captures feedback and audits course quality via forms that automatically feed into Power BI. It draws on data from Canvas and PeopleSoft to present a view of course readiness. The automation and its dashboard iterations were intended to help Group-based leadership track course preparation for the upcoming period. Course Site Overview Dashboard – Supports pre-term preparations by monitoring course site setup status, including homepage configuration, staff pages, announcements, rubrics, and learning material customisation. This tool enables teaching and learning teams in ensuring course sites meet institutional standards before they are published. Automated notifications are sent to stakeholders through email triggers based on course readiness, missing elements, or quality issues. This reduces manual monitoring and allows targeted support to convenors and teaching staff, improving progress efficiency (Varun et al., 2024), with a focus on the student experience. The dashboards also support evidence-based decisions for curriculum improvements and staff development. Our approach illustrates system architecture, automation workflows, and real-world use cases in an Australian university, demonstrating how the adoption of an integrated digital ecosystem can lead to more informed, timely, efficient, and insightful academic decision-making and effective learning design practices. This automation is currently being adopted across three of four Academic Groups. Future directions include expanding university-wide and researching its application across all Academic Groups. Overall, our approach highlights the potential of low-code/no-code automation and Power BI tools in higher education to address administrative challenges, foster proactive teaching quality engagement, and streamline cross-team collaboration through data transparency. Sharing this approach can benefit learning designers, academic leaders, and ed-tech specialists in building sustainable and efficient systems for curriculum quality and academic readiness using existing institutional tools.

  • From screen to student: University educators’ perceptions of cognitive engagement in online learning

    Dhiaan Sidhu, Polly K. Lai

    The growth of online learning in higher education, accelerated by technological advancements and the COVID-19 pandemic, has highlighted the importance of accessibility and flexibility for students. Within this context, cognitive engagement refers to the mental effort students invest in understanding and internalising content (Martin & Borup, 2022), which is positively linked to student satisfaction and academic performance (Fredricks et al., 2019). As such, fostering cognitive engagement should be a central focus in the design and delivery of online learning. This study explores how university educators perceive students' cognitive engagement in online learning. Limited research examines how university educators' perceptions align with learning designers and students on cognitive engagement in online learning. Understanding this is important as misalignment may impact student learning outcomes. Sixteen teachers (male: 8; female: 8) from two Australian universities completed a survey containing five Likert-scale items (from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) exploring their perceptions of students' cognitive engagement across learner-to-teacher, learner-to-learner and learner-to-content interactions (Moore, 1989). The questionnaire was adopted from Chi et al. (2014) Interactive, constructive, active and passive modes of cognitive engagement (ICAP) framework. The participants taught various disciplines including law, business, engineering, science, and health. Of the participants, five reported having fewer than five years of online teaching experience, six had between six and ten years of experience, and seven had been teaching online for more than 11 years. This sample represents the diversity of Australian university educators and demonstrated a balanced distribution of online teaching experience. Preliminary quantitative analysis indicated that educators perceived students demonstrate higher levels of cognitive engagement when they: (1) received one-on-one guidance and feedback on assessments from their teacher (mean = 4.37), (2) engaged in peer debates on case studies (mean = 4.31), and (3) worked on authentic problem-solving tasks (mean = 4.31). In contrast, the majority of participants perceived lower levels of student cognitive engagement under the following conditions: (1) when teachers delivered online lectures for more than one hour (mean = 2.87), (2) when students were solely reading online content (mean = 2.5), (3) when students reading and clicking through an online presentation (mean = 2.75) and (4) when student watched a video (mean = 2.38) or pre-recorded lecturing video (mean = 2.43) without engaging in active strategies (mean = 2.38). The initial findings suggested that university educators perceived student cognitive engagement primarily through their observations during online classroom and the quality of students’ contributions to peer interactions and assigned tasks. Notably, educators expressed the view that activities, such as reading and clicking through online presentations, do not effectively foster cognitive engagement. This perspective stands contrary to Goode et al. (2022) claims, which suggest that such activities can contribute to learning outcomes. As this study is in its initial stage, the current sample size is relatively small. Ongoing data collection will increase participant numbers, enabling a larger-scale investigation into how university students perceive cognitive engagement in online learning. Expanding the sample will help to strengthen the robustness and generalisability of the findings. Furthermore, we will explore how these perceptions align and differ from those of learning designers and students. Ultimately, the findings aim to inform learning design and teaching practices in higher education to promote effective online learning.

  • Transforming energy and pedagogy: More than a metaphor

    Thomas Cochrane, Gavin Buskes, Lionel Lam

    This poster presentation provides a visual/graphical analysis of the design and implementation of two iterations of an interdisciplinary engineering capstone project. The poster provides a graphical representation of the core project concepts using the analogous circuit for a loudspeaker system as a metaphor for transforming pedagogy (Buskes et al., 2023; Cochrane, Harris, et al., 2024). The poster also graphically maps the project against two analysis frameworks: Activity theory (Cochrane, 2024; Cochrane, Galvin, et al., 2024) and Kolmos et al., (2024) model of interdisciplinary project types in engineering education, mapped to the metaphor of the transformation of energy in a loudspeaker system as an illustration of transforming pedagogy to inform the discussion with participants. An important part of the engineering design process is to understand the interface with other disciplines of engineering and to be able to specify appropriate requirements and verify that those requirements are being met. If groups of engineering students do not interact while at university, they are ill-prepared to do such design across disciplinary boundaries in the workplace. Moreover, if they are incapable of being able to formally specify what they require from other engineers, then they would not be able to verify that the design meets those specifications. The project implemented an educational design project to develop a multi-disciplinary final year capstone project involving students from the Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering as well as the Department of Mechanical Engineering. Designing a loudspeaker system, which contains electrical and mechanical systems that interact in a complex transfer of energy from electrical to mechanical to acoustic energy, is an inherently multidisciplinary endeavour consisting of both electrical and mechanical engineering concepts. The equivalent circuit of a loudspeaker system also serves as a metaphor of how the project aims to not only transform energy from electrical to acoustic, but fundamentally transform pedagogy (Mezirow, 2018) from teacher-centred to student-centred design teams to develop learner agency (Hase & Blaschke, 2021). The project case study is informed by a scoping review of the literature around interdisciplinary education projects, with an a priori protocol. The project is framed using Educational Design Research (McKenney et al., 2022) that involves collaboration from key stakeholders. As well as the Poster the project methodology will be shared with conference participants through an accompanying PADLET page to share the presentation links and resources, as well as engage the participants in a Poll and invite questions and contributions from the participants, including sharing examples of their own case studies of designing and implementing interdisciplinary real world educational projects.

  • Liveness at ASCILITE 2025: Reflections for future-focused actions

    Wendy Taleo, Penny Wheeler, Katie Freund

    This poster explores the concept of liveness (Chhaya, 2015; Lee, 2021; van Es, 2017) within the conference theme Your Journey: here, the journey is the path of engagement, reflection and new knowledge for attendees at ASCILITE 2025. For TEL practitioners and researchers, liveness at the conference involves working with context (of the presenters' institutions, of the history of theories and technologies) as we enter the twists and turns of a project timeline, engaging with the presenter as a fellow traveler accompanied by their tech companions. Beyond the conference, liveness can inform practitioners’ designs, interactions, and evaluations of their tech-enabled educational work. Taking a socio-material perspective (Fenwick et al., 2011) allows the authors to examine content as well as networks, spaces, technologies, interactions, and affect (Lupinacci, 2019) generated through participation at ASCILITE. The authors will engage in collaborative autoethnography (Chang et al., 2012) as the method for interrogating the learning journey of attending this conference and future conferences. Departing from traditional poster presentations, this evolving document enables attendees to add to the space available in the poster for near-real-time content generated from the conference experience. We invite participants to engage with the authors and the poster itself by contributing via social media and on Padlet using the provided QR codes to share their reflections on this conference and the ASCILITE journey. We aim to encourage a timely immediate engagement with authors of new knowledge, as characterised in constructivist and experiential learning environments. Utilising poetic inquiry and reflexive praxis as diverse examples of tertiary practice (Table 1, S5), the authors will create an emergent poster by mining social media around online engagement at the conference and by using bricolage (Honeychurch, 2023) to add to relevant areas of the poster (Table 1, based on the Activity-Centred Analysis and Design (ACAD) framework (Goodyear et al., 2021) for learning designs: epistemic (“liveness”), social (“community”) and set (“technologies and tools”). This approach utilises TEL practice for a timely and effective surfacing of attendee reflections (Gibbs, 1988) and conference evaluation. It challenges the notion of the conference as merely a collection of "what was", instead, positioning it as a space to look forward to and encourage creativity, connectivity and learning (Bryant, 2024; Casey et al., 2024). The completed poster will provide a novel evaluation of the conference experience (Chapman et al., 2007) by integrating reflection directly within the conference and prompting the community to put their learning into practice.

  • A scalable approach for sizing learning and estimating student workload for adaptive higher-education courses

    Spice Wang, Hilary Wheaton, Pip Manifold

    Background As higher-education providers unbundle programs into micro-credentials and other variable-credit offerings, educators need a way to convert credit points into balanced hours of teaching and learning. In Australia, this is complicated by the lack of a national conversion formula and the coexistence of units that may carry anything from a small to a large credit point (e.g., 1 to 24 credit points or the local equivalent). Working in a central educational-practice team charged with curriculum innovation and architecture, we were repeatedly asked: How many credit points—and corresponding hours—should we allocate to a given mix of learning and assessment activities? What guidance can we offer when a unit carries fewer credit points than our legacy subjects? How can we design stackable short courses that still meet university policy and external volume-of-learning requirements? Aspiration and approach To address the above needs, our aim was to create a scalable sizing framework and digital workload estimator that aligns credit points, assessment, and student effort while remaining adaptable across diverse credit systems. Drawing on sector guidelines, workload literature, and institutional policy, we produced step-by-step guidance for balancing scheduled hours, learner-directed study, and assessment effort. This guidance is hosted on SharePoint and was then turned to a lightweight digital tool called Student Workload Estimator (SWE)—which generates course workload maps visually and supports adaptable program structures. Development snapshot We began with a spreadsheet prototype that encoded word-to-time equivalences and assessment-load caps. In collaboration with the university’s evaluation specialist, this logic was rebuilt in a low-code platform using Microsoft Power App, maintaining security and version control. All formulas derive from an evidence-informed framework; full methodological detail will appear in a companion journal article. Poster experience The poster will visualise student workload estimator’s workflow, illustrating the underlying hour-allocation logic. Audience takeaways include: A visual map of the literature and guidelines that underpin the credit-to-hours formulas, plus a QR link to the full bibliography. An annotated diagram of the framework’s core components (baseline contact hours, task-to-time multipliers, assessment-load caps) with tips for local adaptation. A scan-to-watch demo video walkthrough of the SWE, plus downloadable templates and a facilitation guide for CP, ECTS, or contact-hour models. Relevance to “Adaptable Learners” themes The Student Workload Estimator provides educators a real-time visibility of workload requirements, allowing courses to be flexible across credit points while considering learner well-being in workload. By translating high-level policy into an intuitive digital resource, the tool not only models how technology can nurture adaptive learning communities but also provides a practical mechanism for delivering the flexible learning options today’s adaptable learners need. Next steps Since its launch a year ago, the estimator has attracted steady enquiries and positive feedback from educators who report clearer workload conversations and smoother course-approval cycles. Building on this momentum, we will: (1) publish a research article on its theoretical foundations and curricular impact; (2) add use requested functions—such as creative-project workload calculators—via co-design workshops; and (3) develop a student-facing version to help learners plan and manage their own study time.

  • Adaptability in transitioning to an innovative digital learning platform among educators in health sciences

    Abirami Ramalingam, Sharyn Carnahan, Accamma Oommen, Alex Gavino, Lisa Casanelia, Saher Ali, Hannah Wechkunanukul

    Background Digital access and flexible delivery approaches have become increasingly important in higher education, particularly with advances in blended and online learning. In the last decade, Learning Management Systems (LMSs) have emerged as essential platforms that facilitate adaptable, resilient, and learner-centered environments (Pozo-Sanchez et al. 2022; Olszewski & Crompton, 2020). Our institution has recently transitioned to an innovative LMS, powered by Canvas, Microsoft Teams, and integrated with complementary digital tools, entitled ‘MyLearn Ecosystem’. The ‘MyLearn-My Experience’ study was established to explore the educators’ experience in using the MyLearn Ecosystem. Method A mixed method approach was employed to gather reflections from academic staff during the first year of MyLearn implementation through an anonymous online survey. The study measure user experiences in different domains and the key focuses of this paper are reflections on functionality, communication tools and support of MyLearn. Quantitative data was analyzed using SPSS and thematic analysis was conducted for qualitative data. Findings Overall, there were 28 respondents with 17 completing all the questions. All respondents were aged between 36-55 years and 93% were females. Most participants (80%) held permanent employment status. Slightly over 80% of participants never used Canvas software prior to the MyLearn ecosystem; however, just under 80% of them reported that they were proficient in using digital technology. Some functions and tools for teaching and learning activities were commonly used by 60% of participants. There were some functions and tools that were never used by most of the respondents, including the Discussion Forum (40%); New Analytics (53%); and MyLearn Calendar (60%). The reliability of the system was rated as poor function by 80% of respondents followed by MS Teams meeting as an online class (60%). By contrast, 80% of the respondents rated ‘access to classes and ‘access to resources’ as acceptable or good functions in MyLearn system. Most of the reflections in using MyLearn system were negative experiences due to the poor reliability of the system and additional workload to cope with adaptation to the new system. Some quotes from reflections: “It has increased my workload”; “… add many administrative work”; “MS Teams has never worked well”; and “I was blocked from the online chat forum”. Outcomes and Implications This study revealed the user experience in adaptation to digital transitions in LMS platforms that could influence adaptability, teaching quality, and stakeholder satisfaction among educators. These findings recommend ongoing improvements to ensure that MyLearn Ecosystem continues to support the quality of teaching and learning based on the evolving needs of educators while sustaining positive learning outcomes.

  • Reading between the GenAI lines: Twenty authors’ perceptions of GenAI-summaries of their research and the implications for learning and teaching

    Kay Hammond, Samantha Newell

    Students trust GenAI-summaries of academic articles despite known issues of hallucinations and errors (Markowitz, 2024). Although this saves time, it costs understanding and engagement with the research findings, context, and authors. In addition, within the academic text, writers craft a credible sense of self alongside balanced representation of subject matter to create a persuasive argument (Hyland, 2005; Ivanic & Camps, 2001; Matsuda & Tardy, 2007). Students are increasingly relying on GenAI to provide summaries of academic articles (Newell & Dahlenburg, 2024). The changes in the way that readers (in this case, student readers) engage with scholarly knowledge is often explored from the perspective of the reader (Schmidt & Meir, 2023; Xia et al., 2025). Comparatively little attention has been paid to how authors’ feel about the proliferation of GenAI-summaries of their work. As such, we explored journal article authors’ perceptions of the accuracy of GenAI summaries of their work. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 Australasian-resident authors to compare a summary they wrote with an AI-generated summary (ChatGPT4). Interview transcripts were analysed qualitatively through Reflexive Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2021). The following research questions were posed: 1) How are AI-generated journal article summaries perceived as accurate/inaccurate by their authors? 2) How do authors feel about the author-reader relationship when readers only engage with GenAI-summaries?, and 3) What potential implications exist when using GenAI-summaries for learning and teaching? Authors noted although the AI-summaries appeared accurate overall, they were accurate but vague. However, as we progressed through the interviews, authors identified inaccuracies and omissions of: context, disciplinary conventions and concepts, important findings and limitations, and connection/attribution of ideas to prior authors. Participants described how AI-summaries present author suggestions as established facts. The absence of methodological details was concerning because methods sections provide information on researchers’ decisions, validity of the findings, and training for novice researchers/students. In summaries of the introduction sections, prior literature was omitted, thus misrepresenting the study as an isolated unit instead of ongoing knowledge-building conversations. AI summaries, therefore, lacked a sense of scholarly community, “no map to take readers to the key people...and further reading”. Several authors explained their sense of disconnection from the reader through the loss of their voice in the linguistically “flattened” output. This felt like losing individuality as everyone’s English sounds the same. Some academic authors felt disappointed, robbed, or slapped in the face that the loss of time readers would spend engaging with their work would not be reciprocated by readers only using generated summaries. We present a model that illustrates these issues of accuracy and writer-reader relationship for educators to use to guide students through critically evaluating AI outputs. Students can make informed choices about when to iteratively prompt, and when to consult/read the full article. This model can increase student understanding of the author, community, and previous research context from which the research has evolved.

Showing 1–13 of 68 articles