title: Re-designing forum discussions to combat GenAI use

authors: Gibbons, Stephanie

abstract: Our online Philosophy papers make extensive use of forum posts for discussion of moral issues. It is tempting for students to make use of GenAI for these short, informal contributions. My aim in these courses was to discourage the use of AI, to demonstrate to students the shortcomings of GenAI, and to reduce any advantage of using it.
I seeded forums with clearly identified examples of what GenAI would write. Students could earn marks for sensible criticisms of AI contributions. But no marks were available for writing the kind of things GenAI produces. This technique prevents me from having to prove AI use: such posts are simply not worth marks. While the assessment design cannot prevent students from using GenAI, it both raises their awareness of its shortcomings, and reduces any advantage from its use. Successful use of this method requires careful communication in setting up the assessment, and regular monitoring and reinforcement. I was straightforward with students about what I was trying to achieve, and why. I learned a great deal about how to frame assessment questions, and what to emphasise to students. My constant refrain was “this is what AI can do already. What value are you adding?” The method showed some success in reducing GenAI use, and response from students was very positive.

text: Re-designing forum discussions to combat GenAI use Our online Philosophy papers make extensive use of forum posts for discussion of moral issues. It is tempting for students to make use of GenAI for these short, informal contributions. My aim in these courses was to discourage the use of AI, to demonstrate to students the shortcomings of GenAI, and to reduce any advantage of using it.
I seeded forums with clearly identified examples of what GenAI would write. Students could earn marks for sensible criticisms of AI contributions. But no marks were available for writing the kind of things GenAI produces. This technique prevents me from having to prove AI use: such posts are simply not worth marks. While the assessment design cannot prevent students from using GenAI, it both raises their awareness of its shortcomings, and reduces any advantage from its use. Successful use of this method requires careful communication in setting up the assessment, and regular monitoring and reinforcement. I was straightforward with students about what I was trying to achieve, and why. I learned a great deal about how to frame assessment questions, and what to emphasise to students. My constant refrain was “this is what AI can do already. What value are you adding?” The method showed some success in reducing GenAI use, and response from students was very positive.

year: 2024

title: Dama Wallabies: Their history of colonization and control at Okataina/Tarawera

authors: Williams, Dale

abstract: Dama wallabies (Macropus eugenii) were liberated near the southern end of Lake Okareka in 1912. By the 1970s their numbers had built to high levels in the forests surrounding Okareka, Okataina and Tarawera and the damage they were causing to the forest understorey was marked.
In 1984 the New Zealand Forest Service established a pair of ‘exclosure plots’ at Okataina designed to isolate the impacts of wallabies from those caused by deer. A decade later when the vegetation plots were remeasured, species diversity had increased by 142% where both deer and wallabies were excluded. Diversity had increased by 57% where wallabies were excluded and continued to decline by 7% where browsing was unrestricted.
Between 1988 and 1999 three aerial poisoning operations and some ground based pest control, targeting wallabies and possums, were carried out around Okataina and the Makatiti Dome.
Though these operations were highly successful at reducing wallaby numbers (93-95% reductions based on cleared-plot faecal pellet counts) remeasurement of permanent 20x20 metre vegetation plots showed no response in the forest understorey. To some
extent this is not surprising as the control operations were effectively ‘one-offs’ in separate areas and only limited follow-up control took place.

text: Dama Wallabies: Their history of colonization and control at Okataina/Tarawera Dama wallabies (Macropus eugenii) were liberated near the southern end of Lake Okareka in 1912. By the 1970s their numbers had built to high levels in the forests surrounding Okareka, Okataina and Tarawera and the damage they were causing to the forest understorey was marked.
In 1984 the New Zealand Forest Service established a pair of ‘exclosure plots’ at Okataina designed to isolate the impacts of wallabies from those caused by deer. A decade later when the vegetation plots were remeasured, species diversity had increased by 142% where both deer and wallabies were excluded. Diversity had increased by 57% where wallabies were excluded and continued to decline by 7% where browsing was unrestricted.
Between 1988 and 1999 three aerial poisoning operations and some ground based pest control, targeting wallabies and possums, were carried out around Okataina and the Makatiti Dome.
Though these operations were highly successful at reducing wallaby numbers (93-95% reductions based on cleared-plot faecal pellet counts) remeasurement of permanent 20x20 metre vegetation plots showed no response in the forest understorey. To some
extent this is not surprising as the control operations were effectively ‘one-offs’ in separate areas and only limited follow-up control took place.

year: 2015

title: The Research Data Landscape in Aotearoa New Zealand: A report undertaken in partnership with the Aotearoa New Zealand Committee on Data in Research (CoDiR)

authors: Sterling, Rogena

abstract: Data and datasets are often described as a core strategic asset for Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa) and indispensable for the government’s ambition of being a small nation with an advanced, adaptive, and inclusive economy. In the context of our research, science and innovation (RSI) ecosystem, the value of data cannot be overstated. 
The purpose of this report is to provide a review (the Review) of Aotearoa’s research data landscape. Research data are data that are used as primary sources to support technical or scientific enquiry, research, or artistic activity; as evidence in the research process; and/or are commonly accepted in the
research community as necessary to provide a foundation for, or validate research findings and results. The Review covers four core areas:

• Te Tiriti o Waitangi and data sovereignty
• research data ecosystems
• research data infrastructure
• research data cultures.

Although informed by international data landscape reviews, this Review emphasises the unique considerations and structural features of the Aotearoa data landscape. Based on our analysis and observations from a series of targeted workshops, we provide a set of recommendations on how to strengthen the system and advance shared aspirations for better outcomes. The recommendations are organised under the five headings from Nosek’s Pyramid of Social Change, setting out a phased strategy for culture and behaviour change. In implementing these recommendations, we recognise that the articles of Te Tiriti should be embedded throughout, consistent with sector requirements (MBIE, 2023d).

text: The Research Data Landscape in Aotearoa New Zealand: A report undertaken in partnership with the Aotearoa New Zealand Committee on Data in Research (CoDiR) Data and datasets are often described as a core strategic asset for Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa) and indispensable for the government’s ambition of being a small nation with an advanced, adaptive, and inclusive economy. In the context of our research, science and innovation (RSI) ecosystem, the value of data cannot be overstated. 
The purpose of this report is to provide a review (the Review) of Aotearoa’s research data landscape. Research data are data that are used as primary sources to support technical or scientific enquiry, research, or artistic activity; as evidence in the research process; and/or are commonly accepted in the
research community as necessary to provide a foundation for, or validate research findings and results. The Review covers four core areas:

• Te Tiriti o Waitangi and data sovereignty
• research data ecosystems
• research data infrastructure
• research data cultures.

Although informed by international data landscape reviews, this Review emphasises the unique considerations and structural features of the Aotearoa data landscape. Based on our analysis and observations from a series of targeted workshops, we provide a set of recommendations on how to strengthen the system and advance shared aspirations for better outcomes. The recommendations are organised under the five headings from Nosek’s Pyramid of Social Change, setting out a phased strategy for culture and behaviour change. In implementing these recommendations, we recognise that the articles of Te Tiriti should be embedded throughout, consistent with sector requirements (MBIE, 2023d).

year: 2023