Sistematik Derlemeler ve Meta Analiz
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster
Yıl 2025, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 164 - 171, 30.06.2025
https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1697199

Öz

Kaynakça

  • REFERENCES Arslankara, V. B., & Usta, E. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence as a lifelong learning self efficacy: Usage and competence scale. Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, 6 (2), 288-302.
  • Baszile, D. T. (2017). On the virtues of currere. Currere Exchange Journal, 1 (1).
  • Bozkurt, A. (2024). GenAI et al. Cocreation, authorship, ownership, academic ethics and integrity in a time of generative AI. Open Praxis, 16(1), 1-10.
  • Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D., & Raymond, L. (2025). Generative AI at work. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, qjae044.
  • Cacho, R. M. (2024). Integrating Generative AI in University Teaching and Learning: A Model for Balanced Guidelines. Online Learning, 28(3), 55-81.
  • Cardon, P., Fleischmann, C., Aritz, J., Logemann, M., & Heidewald, J. (2023). The challenges and opportunities of AI-assisted writing: Developing AI literacy for the AI age. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 86(3), 257-295.
  • Cassinadri, G. (2024). ChatGPT and the technology-education tension: Applying contextual virtue epistemology to a cognitive artifact. Philosophy & Technology, 37(1), 14.
  • de Barros, E. C. (2024). Understanding the influence of digital technology on human cognitive functions: A narrative review. IBRO Neuroscience Reports.
  • Fuchs, K. (2023). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of NLP models in higher education: is Chat GPT a blessing or a curse?. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 8, p. 1166682). Frontiers Media SA.
  • Fütterer, T., Fischer, C., Alekseeva, A., Chen, X., Tate, T., Warschauer, M., & Gerjets, P. (2023). ChatGPT in education: global reactions to AI innovations. Scientific reports, 13(1), 15310.
  • Germano, W. (2014). From dissertation to book. University of Chicago Press.
  • Işık, S., Çakır, R., & Korkmaz, Ö. (2024). Teachers' Perception Scale Towards the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Education. Participatory Educational Research, 11(Prof. Dr. H. Ferhan Odabaşı Gift Issue), 80-94.
  • Jongkind, R., Elings, E., Joukes, E., Broens, T., Leopold, H., Wiesman, F., & Meinema, J. (2025). Is your curriculum GenAI-proof? A method for GenAI impact assessment and a case study. MedEdPublish, 15(11), 11.
  • Levine, S., Beck, S. W., Mah, C., Phalen, L., & PIttman, J. (2024). How do students use ChatGPT as a writing support?. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy.
  • Logan, S. W. (2024). Generative Artificial Intelligence Users Beware: Ethical Concerns of ChatGPT Use in Publishing Research. Journal of Motor Learning and Development, 12(3), 429-436.
  • Long, D. and Magerko, B. (2020) What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In: Bernhaupt R, Mueller F, Verweij D, Andres J (eds) Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 1–16
  • Henderson, J. (2015). Reconceptualizing curriculum development: Inspiring and informing action. New York: Routledge.
  • Henderson, J. G. ve Gornik, R. (2007). Transformative curriculum leadership. New York: Pearson College Division.
  • Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. The Center for Curriculum Redesign.
  • Ma, Y. (2025). Living our subjective presence: An interview with William F. Pinar. Currere and Praxis, 2(1), 1-12.
  • Mahowald, K., Ivanova, A. A., Blank, I. A., Kanwisher, N., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Fedorenko, E. (2024). Dissociating language and thought in large language models. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
  • Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1987). The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. New Science Library/Shambhala Publications.
  • Mishra, P., Margerum-Leys, J., Trainin, G., Hill-Jackson, V., Bobley, L., Bedesem, P. L., ... & Craig, C. J. (2025). Teacher Education in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence: Introducing the Special Issue. Journal of Teacher Education, 76(3), 225-229.
  • Ong, W. J., & Hartley, J. (2013). Orality and literacy. New York: Routledge.
  • Pinar, W. (1975). Currere: toward reconceptualization. Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists, 396-414.
  • Pinar, W. F. (1994). The method of Currere. Counterpoints, 2, 19-27.
  • Rowe, A. And Phillips, G. (2024). How Can Students Use Text Generative Programs Ethically and Effectively? (Doctoral dissertation, WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE).
  • Shanmugasundaram, M., & Tamilarasu, A. (2023). The impact of digital technology, social media, and artificial intelligence on cognitive functions: a review. Frontiers in Cognition, 2, 1203077.
  • Trust, T., Whalen, J., & Mouza, C. (2023). Editorial: ChatGPT: Challenges, opportunities, and implications for teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 23(1), 1-23.
  • UNESCO (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO Publishing.
  • Valcea, S., Hamdani, M. R., & Wang, S. (2024). Exploring the impact of ChatGPT on business school education: Prospects, boundaries, and paradoxes. Journal of Management Education, 48(5), 915-947.
  • Zhao, X., Cox, A., & Cai, L. (2024). ChatGPT and the digitisation of writing. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-9.

Rethinking Teacher Education in the ChatGPT Era through a Currere Perspective

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 164 - 171, 30.06.2025
https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1697199

Öz

This study focuses on the potential impact of generative artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT—which are capable of performing cognitive tasks such as knowing, summarizing, interpreting, applying, analyzing, reasoning, and creative problem solving—on teacher education and curriculum design. Written texts used both as learning activities and as evaluative tools are considered representations of effective learning and cognitive processes. As the study is framed within a literature review based on the currere approach, it integrates both a systematic review of relevant sources and autobiographical references. GenAI has emerged as a cognitive artifact that enables both teachers and students to assign and engage in complex cognitive tasks. To ensure the meaningful use of this cognitive artifact, the currere method is proposed as a pedagogical framework that encourages students to focus on their own learning and meaning-making journeys by reflecting on their life and educational experiences. Moreover, the concept of embodied cognition is emphasized as a valuable perspective in defining the cognitive domain of the learning process. It is also evident that the interaction with GenAI, which often takes place in a space of solitude intertwined with dialogic exchanges, requires adherence to ethical principles. When learners focus on their own processes of meaning-making, they can perceive the connection between academic knowledge and their personal life narratives. Consequently, the texts produced will be not only academically grounded but also personally original.

Kaynakça

  • REFERENCES Arslankara, V. B., & Usta, E. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence as a lifelong learning self efficacy: Usage and competence scale. Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, 6 (2), 288-302.
  • Baszile, D. T. (2017). On the virtues of currere. Currere Exchange Journal, 1 (1).
  • Bozkurt, A. (2024). GenAI et al. Cocreation, authorship, ownership, academic ethics and integrity in a time of generative AI. Open Praxis, 16(1), 1-10.
  • Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D., & Raymond, L. (2025). Generative AI at work. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, qjae044.
  • Cacho, R. M. (2024). Integrating Generative AI in University Teaching and Learning: A Model for Balanced Guidelines. Online Learning, 28(3), 55-81.
  • Cardon, P., Fleischmann, C., Aritz, J., Logemann, M., & Heidewald, J. (2023). The challenges and opportunities of AI-assisted writing: Developing AI literacy for the AI age. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 86(3), 257-295.
  • Cassinadri, G. (2024). ChatGPT and the technology-education tension: Applying contextual virtue epistemology to a cognitive artifact. Philosophy & Technology, 37(1), 14.
  • de Barros, E. C. (2024). Understanding the influence of digital technology on human cognitive functions: A narrative review. IBRO Neuroscience Reports.
  • Fuchs, K. (2023). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of NLP models in higher education: is Chat GPT a blessing or a curse?. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 8, p. 1166682). Frontiers Media SA.
  • Fütterer, T., Fischer, C., Alekseeva, A., Chen, X., Tate, T., Warschauer, M., & Gerjets, P. (2023). ChatGPT in education: global reactions to AI innovations. Scientific reports, 13(1), 15310.
  • Germano, W. (2014). From dissertation to book. University of Chicago Press.
  • Işık, S., Çakır, R., & Korkmaz, Ö. (2024). Teachers' Perception Scale Towards the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Education. Participatory Educational Research, 11(Prof. Dr. H. Ferhan Odabaşı Gift Issue), 80-94.
  • Jongkind, R., Elings, E., Joukes, E., Broens, T., Leopold, H., Wiesman, F., & Meinema, J. (2025). Is your curriculum GenAI-proof? A method for GenAI impact assessment and a case study. MedEdPublish, 15(11), 11.
  • Levine, S., Beck, S. W., Mah, C., Phalen, L., & PIttman, J. (2024). How do students use ChatGPT as a writing support?. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy.
  • Logan, S. W. (2024). Generative Artificial Intelligence Users Beware: Ethical Concerns of ChatGPT Use in Publishing Research. Journal of Motor Learning and Development, 12(3), 429-436.
  • Long, D. and Magerko, B. (2020) What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations. In: Bernhaupt R, Mueller F, Verweij D, Andres J (eds) Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 1–16
  • Henderson, J. (2015). Reconceptualizing curriculum development: Inspiring and informing action. New York: Routledge.
  • Henderson, J. G. ve Gornik, R. (2007). Transformative curriculum leadership. New York: Pearson College Division.
  • Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. The Center for Curriculum Redesign.
  • Ma, Y. (2025). Living our subjective presence: An interview with William F. Pinar. Currere and Praxis, 2(1), 1-12.
  • Mahowald, K., Ivanova, A. A., Blank, I. A., Kanwisher, N., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Fedorenko, E. (2024). Dissociating language and thought in large language models. Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
  • Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1987). The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. New Science Library/Shambhala Publications.
  • Mishra, P., Margerum-Leys, J., Trainin, G., Hill-Jackson, V., Bobley, L., Bedesem, P. L., ... & Craig, C. J. (2025). Teacher Education in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence: Introducing the Special Issue. Journal of Teacher Education, 76(3), 225-229.
  • Ong, W. J., & Hartley, J. (2013). Orality and literacy. New York: Routledge.
  • Pinar, W. (1975). Currere: toward reconceptualization. Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists, 396-414.
  • Pinar, W. F. (1994). The method of Currere. Counterpoints, 2, 19-27.
  • Rowe, A. And Phillips, G. (2024). How Can Students Use Text Generative Programs Ethically and Effectively? (Doctoral dissertation, WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE).
  • Shanmugasundaram, M., & Tamilarasu, A. (2023). The impact of digital technology, social media, and artificial intelligence on cognitive functions: a review. Frontiers in Cognition, 2, 1203077.
  • Trust, T., Whalen, J., & Mouza, C. (2023). Editorial: ChatGPT: Challenges, opportunities, and implications for teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 23(1), 1-23.
  • UNESCO (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO Publishing.
  • Valcea, S., Hamdani, M. R., & Wang, S. (2024). Exploring the impact of ChatGPT on business school education: Prospects, boundaries, and paradoxes. Journal of Management Education, 48(5), 915-947.
  • Zhao, X., Cox, A., & Cai, L. (2024). ChatGPT and the digitisation of writing. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-9.
Toplam 32 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim (Diğer)
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Oktay Akbaş

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2025
Gönderilme Tarihi 11 Mayıs 2025
Kabul Tarihi 26 Haziran 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Akbaş, O. (2025). Rethinking Teacher Education in the ChatGPT Era through a Currere Perspective. Journal of Teacher Education and Lifelong Learning, 7(1), 164-171. https://doi.org/10.51535/tell.1697199

2617220107