Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Richard Ko

dblp:374/8822 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0009-0001-4300-9625ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-AI interaction · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Human-AI interaction
stakeholder perspectives
0.812024
Teachers, Parents, and Students' perspectives on Integrating Generative AI into Elementary Literacy Education · CHI 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

workshop · 0.8interviews · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Teachers, Parents, and Students' perspectives on Integrating Generative AI into Elementary Literacy Education
abstract
The viral launch of new generative AI (GAI) systems, such as ChatGPT and Text-to-Image (TTL) generators, sparked questions about how they can be effectively incorporated into writing education. However, it is still unclear how teachers, parents, and students perceive and suspect GAI systems in elementary school settings. We conducted a workshop with twelve families (parent-child dyads) with children ages 8-12 and interviewed sixteen teachers in order to understand each stakeholder’s perspectives and opinions on GAI systems for learning and teaching writing. We found that the GAI systems could be beneficial in generating adaptable teaching materials for teachers, enhancing ideation, and providing students with personalized, timely feedback. However, there are concerns over authorship, students’ agency in learning, and uncertainty concerning bias and misinformation. In this article, we discuss design strategies to mitigate these constraints by implementing an adults-oversight system, balancing AI-role allocation, and facilitating customization to enhance students’ agency over writing projects.
Ariel Han, Xiaofei Zhou 0004, Zhenyao Cai, Shenshen Han, Richard Ko, Seth Corrigan, Kylie Peppler
CHI5