Generative AI Portfolio | CARDENAS-DOW, Melissa | NURS 170 | observe • analyze • strategize

NURS 170: Foundations of Evidence-Based Nursing Practice

Observe ⚫︎ Analyze ⚫︎ Strategize

Reflection on Instructional Change:

I opted to focus on the ACUE Gen AI practice of empowering students to use AI responsibly. As an instruction librarian, I often visit classroom spaces in collaboration with the course instructor, bringing in information and exercises that can help students critically think about information and the research projects they are working on for the course. As part of the steps in my thinking and understanding, I decided to harness the demonstrative power of comparison. I developed a short in-class activity that would invite students to brainstorm their research topics using a subject database and comparing these with output they got from a Gen AI tool, like ChatGPT. The exercise is heavily discussion-based, intended to surface observations and invite students to make analyses of output and search results, then strategize their next steps. I first started with a class discussion on how they think a Gen AI tool can be valuable to them in the research process. To help facilitate the discussion, I used Google Jamboard and instructed the students to answer the prompts I put on the board with little sticky notes. After spending a few minutes on this first question, we moved on to asking ChatGPT for subtopics of the main research topic they were working on individually for the course. I asked the students to post sticky notes of the question they asked ChatGPT. For the third jamboard, I asked students to ask ChatGPT for keywords related to their individual research topic and post the question they asked ChatGPT. The intent here is to differentiate between the categories assigned to subjects and the keywords used to search for them. For the final jamboard, I asked the students to open up CINAHL subject headings (CINAHL = Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and use one of the keywords ChatGPT suggested. Using CINAHL subject headings is different from conducting a search in CINAHL, since the subject headings are the words CINAHL uses to categorize articles and other database content in order to make them findable. Then, I asked students to think about the strengths and weaknesses of each tool and write these on a sticky note and place them on the jamboard.

I really loved hearing about students needing to evaluate output of Gen AI and making comparisons with CINAHL, a subject database for nursing. During the session, students noticed CINAHL's subject headings tree focused on medical terminology and concepts, while ChatGPT had more generalized language, even slang terms, which were not reflected in CINAHL. As much of information searching depends on the researcher noticing structures and behaviors of their tools and making micro-decisions on what to do next, this discussion-based exercise enhanced student learning, and hopefully, later practice.

Evaluation of information provided, whether it is Gen AI output or subject database search results, the main thrust of my instructional message as a subject librarian. Evaluation of information is key -- in addition to fact checking, evaluation for the purposes of relevance to one's needs is also important. While Gen AI might be better at appearing on target, having a critical stance with information provided is very important since authoritative and professional tone could mask bias, agenda, and other aspects present in any information source. The ACUE Gen AI course activities in the empowering students to use Gen AI responsibly, helped prepare me for the think about the discussion points I'd want them to take away. Because the in-class activity was intended to be discussion, the topic of using Gen AI responsibly came up. Having students focus on the strengths and weaknesses of each tool made room for discussion for responsible and ethical use of information, in general, and Gen AI tools, in particular. During the CTL Observe & Analyze synchronous Zoom session I participated in with other faculty members, we also discussed how the discussion exercise I developed highlighted both the micro-decisions a researcher is confronted with during the research process and the ethics involved with using Gen AI use.

One take-away I have from the CTL Observe & Analyze session is how technology can get in the way of a lesson or class activity. Fortunately, the students in the class were already familiar with Google Jamboard, the tool was easy to use, and worked well as a discussion-enhancing tool. Below is an image of the third Jamboard showing the question, "What are the strengths and weaknesses of each tool?" Students compared CINAHL Subject Headings with the keywords provided by ChatGPT. Each sticky note on the Jamboard was written and placed by students in response to the question.

 

 

Evidence of Instructional Change

Image of second jamboard during the NURS 170 synchronous session on 9/25/2024.

Image of third jamboard during the NURS 170 synchronous session on 9/25/2024.

Badge awarded after finishing the Empowering Students to Use AI Responsibly module of ACUE Gen AI online course.

Practice and Reflect Teaching and Learning with AI:

The Gen AI ACUE course really helped me brainstorm ways an instructional library faculty like me incorporate working with Gen AI tools into information literacy sessions for one-shots (i.e., sessions that are often taught within a semester- or quarter-long course, instead of a grade-bearing term-long class). There is opportunities in taking deeper dives into prompt writing, as well as lessons and activities that work on AI literacy. One primary challenge, however, is providing an effective mix of future-facing activities such as AI literacy with strategies for working with current information environments of our  library discovery tools and databases. 

Course Syllabus

NURS 170 Lesson Plan 09252024.pdf Download NURS 170 Lesson Plan 09252024.pdf

 

Faculty Bio

Melissa I. Cardenas-Dow is a Social Sciences Librarian at Sacramento State University, responsible for the subject areas of psychology, ethnic studies, women’s and gender studies, and counselor education. She is active with the California Faculty Association (CFA), the labor union representing teaching faculty, librarians, counselors, and coaches in the California State University (CSU) system. Currently, she chairs the CFA statewide Librarians Committee. She serves on various Sacramento State University Faculty Senate committees and is currently the library's faculty senator. She also has experience in committees and governance of the American Library Association (ALA), Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL), and the California Academic & Research Libraries Association (CARL).

 

Funding

This work was supported by: US Department of Education Hispanic Serving Institution Project TECH4Equity  US Department of Education Hispanic Serving Institution Project STEM4Equity P031C210012 *Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or the US Department of Education.