This is hopefully the last chapter of a series of activities I have started nearly one year ago. I had reported a case of AI-supported plagiarism in a book on learning analytics which has been published in German last year (see original post here).
The topic of science communication has gained a lot of attention in the last years and no higher educaton institution has not been involved in concepts related to “transfer” activities or the so called “third mission” of higher education institutions.
Some of my regular readers might remember that I have reported a case of AI-supported plagiarism in a book on learning analytics which has been published in German last year see original post here.
Due to lack of good open source project management systems and deficiencies of federal solutions and lack of a local system, I have explored again Nextcloud as an open source option for project management.
I have long waited before I share a special case of AI generated publishing in the field of educational technology which needs a public reflection and review. Approximately 3 months ago, I have received a citation alert which made me curious.
I have written at the end of the last semester a critical review of the concept of future-skills in German (preprint available here, still in review) In Germany, there is a plethora of activism around this concept and many higher education institutions feel the need to react to the hype around these skills.
During a recent review process I have requested from authors that they should address from which standpoint they have approached their qualitative study. While I was referring in this comment the ontological and theoretical levels as formulated by Twining, Heller, Nussbaum & Tsai (2017) in the guidelines for the journal Computers & Education, the authors have understood my request as a call for a „positionality statement“ in which the authors disclose some of their biographical details (white, cis, middle-age) as potentially influencing their research.