Search results
1 – 5 of 5Samuel Boguslawski, Rowan Deer and Mark G. Dawson
Programming education is being rapidly transformed by generative AI tools and educators must determine how best to support students in this context. This study aims to explore the…
Abstract
Purpose
Programming education is being rapidly transformed by generative AI tools and educators must determine how best to support students in this context. This study aims to explore the experiences of programming educators and students to inform future education provision.
Design/methodology/approach
Twelve students and six members of faculty in a small technology-focused university were interviewed. Thematic analysis of the interview data was combined with data collected from a survey of 44 students at the same university. Self-determination theory was applied as an analytical framework.
Findings
Three themes were identified – bespoke learning, affect and support – that significantly impact motivation and learning outcomes in programming education. It was also found that students are already making extensive use of large language models (LLMs). LLMs can significantly improve learner autonomy and sense of competence by improving the options for bespoke learning; fostering emotions that are conducive to engendering and maintaining motivation; and inhibiting the negative affective states that discourage learning. However, current LLMs cannot adequately provide or replace social support, which is still a key factor in learner motivation.
Research limitations/implications
Integrating the use of LLMs into curricula can improve learning motivation and outcomes. It can also free educators from certain tasks, leaving them with more time and capacity to focus their attention on developing social learning opportunities to further enhance learner motivation.
Originality/value
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first attempt to explore the relationship between motivation and LLM use in programming education.
Details
Keywords
J. Ben Arbaugh, Alvin Hwang, Jeffrey J. McNally, Charles J. Fornaciari and Lisa A. Burke-Smalley
This paper aims to compare the nature of three different business and management education (BME) research streams (online/blended learning, entrepreneurship education and…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to compare the nature of three different business and management education (BME) research streams (online/blended learning, entrepreneurship education and experiential learning), along with their citation sources to draw insights on their support and legitimacy bases, with lessons on improving such support and legitimacy for the streams and the wider BME research field.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors analyze the nature of three BME research streams and their citation sources through tests of differences across streams.
Findings
The three streams differ in research foci and approaches such as the use of managerial samples in experiential learning, quantitative studies in online/blended education and literature reviews in entrepreneurship education. They also differ in sources of legitimacy recognition and avenues for mobilization of support. The underlying literature development pattern of the experiential learning stream indicates a need for BME scholars to identify and build on each other’s work.
Research limitations/implications
Identification of different research bases and key supporting literature in the different streams shows important core articles that are useful to build research in each stream.
Practical implications
Readers will understand the different research bases supporting the three research streams, along with their targeted audience and practice implications.
Social implications
The discovery of different support bases for the three different streams helps identify the network of authors and relationships that have been built in each stream.
Originality/value
According to the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to uncover differences in nature and citation sources of the three continuously growing BME research streams with recommendations on ways to improve the support of the three streams.
Details
Keywords
Morteza Ghobakhloo, Masood Fathi, Mohammad Iranmanesh, Mantas Vilkas, Andrius Grybauskas and Azlan Amran
This study offers practical insights into how generative artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance responsible manufacturing within the context of Industry 5.0. It explores how…
Abstract
Purpose
This study offers practical insights into how generative artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance responsible manufacturing within the context of Industry 5.0. It explores how manufacturers can strategically maximize the potential benefits of generative AI through a synergistic approach.
Design/methodology/approach
The study developed a strategic roadmap by employing a mixed qualitative-quantitative research method involving case studies, interviews and interpretive structural modeling (ISM). This roadmap visualizes and elucidates the mechanisms through which generative AI can contribute to advancing the sustainability goals of Industry 5.0.
Findings
Generative AI has demonstrated the capability to promote various sustainability objectives within Industry 5.0 through ten distinct functions. These multifaceted functions address multiple facets of manufacturing, ranging from providing data-driven production insights to enhancing the resilience of manufacturing operations.
Practical implications
While each identified generative AI function independently contributes to responsible manufacturing under Industry 5.0, leveraging them individually is a viable strategy. However, they synergistically enhance each other when systematically employed in a specific order. Manufacturers are advised to strategically leverage these functions, drawing on their complementarities to maximize their benefits.
Originality/value
This study pioneers by providing early practical insights into how generative AI enhances the sustainability performance of manufacturers within the Industry 5.0 framework. The proposed strategic roadmap suggests prioritization orders, guiding manufacturers in decision-making processes regarding where and for what purpose to integrate generative AI.
Details
Keywords
Rashmi Ranjan Panigrahi, Neha Singh and Kamalakanta Muduli
This paper aims to deepen the understanding of robust food supply chains (FSC) in SMEs by exploring and analyzing the literature through the lenses of digital technologies.
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to deepen the understanding of robust food supply chains (FSC) in SMEs by exploring and analyzing the literature through the lenses of digital technologies.
Design/methodology/approach
The study collected data from Scopus spanning from 2010 to 2024, employing selected keywords, and processed it using VOS-viewer and Biblioshiny to derive valid inferences and theoretical arguments.
Findings
The review paper identified several key themes shaping the future of supply chain management – Sustainability in SCM, Industry 4.0, Digitalization with FSCM, Circular Economy, Food Waste with Supply Chain, Food Security and Climate Change. These themes collectively bring transformative opportunities for both the adoption of digital technologies and sustainable practices in food supply chains.
Research limitations/implications
The review found limitations are rooted in financial constraints, institutional barriers and expertise-related challenges encountered within the realm of Digitalization and FSC. Government and corporate houses should focus on these limitations as well as convert them to strengthen the SMEs of FSC.
Originality/value
The study stands out as a pioneering review that not only explores Digitalization in FSC but also explores the link and evidence of SMEs in the unorganized sector, providing unique insights into a previously underexplored area.
Details
Keywords
Morteza Ghobakhloo, Mohammad Iranmanesh, Masood Fathi, Abderahman Rejeb, Behzad Foroughi and Davoud Nikbin
The study seeks to understand the possible opportunities that Industry 5.0 might offer for various aspects of inclusive sustainability. The study aims to discuss existing…
Abstract
Purpose
The study seeks to understand the possible opportunities that Industry 5.0 might offer for various aspects of inclusive sustainability. The study aims to discuss existing perspectives on the classification of Industry 5.0 technologies and their underlying role in materializing the sustainability values of this agenda.
Design/methodology/approach
The study systematically reviewed Industry 5.0 literature based on the PRISMA protocol. The study further employed a detailed content-centric review of eligible documents and conducted evidence mapping to fulfill the research objectives.
Findings
The advancement of Industry 5.0 is currently underway, with noteworthy initial contributions enriching its knowledge base. Although a unanimous definition remains lacking, diverse viewpoints emerge concerning the recognition of fundamental technologies and the potential for yielding sustainable outcomes. The expected contribution of Industry 5.0 to sustainability varies significantly depending on the context and the nature of underlying technologies.
Practical implications
Industry 5.0 holds the potential for advancing sustainability at both the firm and supply chain levels. It is envisioned to contribute proportionately to the three sustainability dimensions. However, the current discourse primarily dwells in theoretical and conceptual domains, lacking empirical exploration of its practical implications.
Originality/value
This study comprehensively explores diverse perspectives on Industry 5.0 technologies and their potential contributions to economic, environmental and social sustainability. Despite its promise, the practical evidence supporting the effectiveness of Industry 5.0 remains limited. Certain conditions are necessary to realize the benefits of Industry 5.0 fully, yet the mechanisms behind these conditions require further investigation. In this regard, the study suggests several potential areas for future research.
Details