At skabe, når alt er færdigt
En undersøgelse af dialogiske rum, når studerende arbejder med AI-billedgenerering i designprocesser
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v17i31.149005Nøgleord:
Generativ AI, Midjourney, Design Thinking, Dialog, videregående uddannelserResumé
Generativ AI (GenAI) vinder frem i uddannelsessammenhænge til understøttelse af tekstproduktion og billedproduktion. Der findes dog begrænset empirisk forskningsgrundlag inden for anvendelsen af AI-billedgeneratorer i undervisningen på videregående uddannelser. Artiklen undersøger, hvordan universitetsstuderende anvender Midjourney i en faciliteret designproces. Det empiriske fundament bygger på et eksplorativt studie, hvor internationale studerende på kandidatuddannelsen Information Studies på Aalborg Universitet skulle designe en legende tilgang til undervisning på et universitet, hvor Midjourney indgik i designprocessen. Med udgangspunkt i dialogisk teori analyseres, hvordan Midjourney indvirker på det dialogiske rum mellem de studerende og teknologien. Artiklen påviser nødvendigheden af 1) at skabe rum for afprøvning, refleksion og diskussion af brugen af GenAI og 2) nuancerede forståelser af, hvordan teknologier som Midjourney kan indgå som dialogpartnere i gruppeprocesser. Resultaterne viser, at det er vigtigt at balancere brugen af analoge og digitale materialer i designprocesserne, hvor både studerendes kritiske stillingtagen samt tilvalg og fravalg af forskellige materialer legitimeres og anerkendes af underviserne.
Downloads
Referencer
Alexander, R. (2018). Developing dialogic teaching: Genesis, process, trial. Research papers in education, 33(5), 561-598.
Askehave, I., Prehn, H. L., Petersen, J., & Pedersen, M. T. (2015). PBL: Problem-based learning. Aalborg University.
Batista, J., Mesquita, A., & Carnaz, G. (2024). Generative AI and Higher Education: Trends, Challenges, and Future Directions from a Systematic Literature Review. Information, 15(11), 676.
Birkbak, A., & Munk, A. (2017). Digitale metoder. Hans Reitzels Forlag, Danmark.
Causey, A. (2017). Drawn to see: Drawing as an ethnographic method. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 43.
Choo, W.L. (2023). Photo Elicitation Interviews. In K. D. Walker, S. Tunison og J.M. Okoko (Eds.). Varieties of qualitative research methods: selected contextual perspectives, Springer. s. 383 - 387.
Dehouche, N., & Dehouche, K. (2023). What’s in a text-to-image prompt? The potential of stable diffusion in visual arts education. Heliyon, 9(6).
Ejsing-Duun, S., & Skovbjerg, H. M. (2019). Design as a Mode of Inquiry in Design Pedagogy and Design Thinking. The International Journal of Art & Design Education, 38(2), 445- 460.
French, F., Levi, D., Maczo, C., Simonaityte, A., Triantafyllidis, S., & Varda, G. (2023). Creative use of OpenAI in education: case studies from game development. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 7(8), 81.
Hansen, N. B., & Dalsgaard, P. (2012). The productive role of material design artefacts in participatory design events. Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense through Design (NordiCHI ‘12), 665–674. New York: ACM.
Harper, D. (2002). Talking about pictures: A case for photoelicitation. Visual studies, vol. 17, no.1, pp. 13-26.
Hashmi, N., & Bal, A. S. (2024). Generative AI in higher education and beyond. Business Horizons.
Hautopp, H. (2022). Drawing Connections – An Exploration of Graphic and Visual Facilitation in Organisational and Higher Educational Contexts. Aalborg Universitetsforlag.
Hautopp, H., & Buhl, M. (2021). Drawing as an Academic Dialogue Tool for Developing Digital Learning Designs in Higher Education. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 19(5), 321-335.
Hautopp, H., & Ejsing-Duun, S. (2020). Spaces of Joint Inquiry Through Visual Facilitation and Representations in Higher Education: An Exploratory case study. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 18(5), 373-386.
Have, K. (2023). Kunstig intelligens. Kunstens storhed eller fald? Mussmann Forlag, Danmark.
Heaven, W. D. (2023). ChatGPT is going to change education, not destroy it. MIT Technology Review. Lokaliseret d.4.9.2024: https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/04/06/1071059/chatgpt-change-not-destroy-education-openai/
Henningsen, B. S. (2022). Video som refleksionsredskab: En undersøgelse af potentialer og udfordringer ved brugen af video i læreprocesser og deltagerinddragende forskning. Aalborg Universitetsforlag.
Hew, K. F., Huang, W., Du, J., & Jia, C. (2023). Using chatbots to support student goal setting and social presence in fully online activities: learner engagement and perceptions. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 35(1), 40-68.
Hewitt, M. A. (2020). Draw in order to see. A cognitive history of architectural design. New York: ORO Editions.
Holflod, K. (2023). Playful learning and boundary-crossing collaboration in higher education: a narrative and synthesising review. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 47(4), 465-480.
IDEO (2025). Design thinking, lokaliseret d. 27.1.2025: https://www.ideo.com/
Interaction Design Foundation (2025). Design Thinking, lokaliseret d. 27.1.2025: https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/what-is-design-thinking-and-why-is-it-so-popular
Jeffrey, T. (2020). Understanding college student perceptions of artificial intelligence. Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 18(2), 8-13.
Knoblauch, H. (2005). Focused ethnography. Forum Qual Soc Res. 6(3):14.
Kurtz, G., Amzalag, M., Shaked, N., Zaguri, Y., Kohen-Vacs, D., Gal, E., & Barak-Medina, E. (2024). Strategies for Integrating Generative AI into Higher Education: Navigating Challenges and Leveraging Opportunities. Education Sciences, 14(5), 503.
Maguire, M. (2022). A framework for user-requirements analysis and development of creative design concepts. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (s. 97-113). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Mercer, N., Wegerif, R., & Major, L. C. (Eds.). (2019). The Routledge international handbook of research on dialogic education. Abingdon: Routledge.
Midjourney. (2024). Playful Learning in Higher Education [AI-genereret billede]. https://www.midjourney.com
Midjourney Prompt Generator (2024). Midjourney Prompt Generator. Lokaliseret d.4.9.2024: https://promptfolder.com/midjourney-prompt-helper/
Mollick, E. R., & Mollick, L. (2023). Using AI to implement effective teaching strategies in classrooms: Five strategies, including prompts. The Wharton School Research Paper.
Neergaard, M. (2021). Dialogisk Undervisning – Traditioner, teorier og metoder til praksis. Dafolo, Frederikshavn, Danmark
Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things. The MIT Press.
Pifarré, M. (2020). Designing a dialogic technology-enhanced pedagogy to support collaborative creativity. Mercer, N., Wegerif, R. & Major (Eds.), I The Routledge International Handbook of Research on Dialogic Education (s. 425-438). New York and London: Routledge.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London, UK: Temple.
Tanggaard, L., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). Kvalitet i kvalitative studier. Brinkmann, S. og Tanggaard, L. Kvalitative metoder – en grundbog.(2. udg.) Hans Reitzels Forlag, s. 533-550.
Trundle C., & Phillips T. (2023). Defining focused ethnography: Disciplinary boundary-work and the imagined divisions between ‘focused’ and ‘traditional’ ethnography in health research - A critical review. Social Science & Medicine, 332(1982), 116108.
Twersky, B., & Suwa, M. (2009). Thinking with sketches. In: Markmann, A., & Wood, K. (eds.), Tools for innovation. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online.
Wall, S. (2015). Focused Ethnography: A Methodological Adaptation for Social Research in Emerging Contexts. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 16(1), Art. 1
Wegerif, R. (2007). Dialogic, Education and Technology: Expanding the Space of Learning. New York: Springer.
Wegerif, R. (2013). Dialogic: Education for the internet age. Routledge, London.
Wegerif, R. (2015). Technology and teaching thinking. R. Wegerif, L. Li & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Research on Teaching Thinking (s. 427–439). New York and London: Routledge.
Downloads
Publiceret
Citation/Eksport
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Copyright (c) 2025 Heidi Hautopp, Sara Paasch Knudsen, Erik Ottar Jensen, Jane Højgaard Retz Jespersen, Birgitte Henningsen
Dette værk er under følgende licens Creative Commons Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel – Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd).
Artikler publiceret i Tidsskriftet for Læring og Medier er licenseret under en Creative Commons Navngivelse-IkkeKommerciel-IngenBearbejdelse 4.0 Unported Licens.
Forfattere bevarer deres ophavsret og giver tidsskriftet ret til første publicering, samtidigt med at værket er omfattet af Creative Commons Attribution-licensen: Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel - Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd). Læs om licensen på http://www.creativecommons.dk/om/.
---
På LOM.dk kan du endvidere finde artikler fra det nu nedlagte Tidsskrift for Universiteternes Efter- og Videreuddannelse (UNEV). Vær opmærksom på, at der gælder særlige regler for UNEV artikler:
Det er forfatterne og evt. andre ophavsret indehavere, der har ophavsretten til artikler udgivet i UNEV regi, og det er en betingelse for adgang til artiklerne, at brugere anerkender og overholder de juridiske retningslinjer forbundet hermed.
- Brugere må downloade og printe én kopi af en hvilken som helst UNEV artikel mhp. private studier eller forskning.
- Det er ikke tilladt at videredistribuere artikler eller anvende disse til indtægtsdækkede aktiviteter eller kommercielle formål.
- Det er tilladt at distribuere URL’en til UNEV artikler.
