On April 7, part of the ETO team attended the CTL Celebration of Teaching showcase at UTSC. It is an exciting event that we look forward to each year, as we see it as a great chance to join, learn, exchange and gather insights. It is also a valuable opportunity to connect with the wider U of T community across campuses.
This year, we found that common theme among the sessions and speakers was exploring learner-centred approaches that support more sustainable teaching and learning practices while integrating critical, inclusive, and innovative perspectives.
Key points we'll take with us
Below, expand the accordion items to see what we attended, learned, and the key takeaways from the sessions:
Session information:
- Effective Models for Integrating Partners into your Course-based EL Assignments | Julie Witt, Work-Integrated Learning (WIL) Team Lead, Arts & Science Co-op & WIL, UTSC; Jocelyn Babudri, WIL Coordinator, Arts & Science Co-op, UTSC
- Developing Critical Awareness Through Photography in Arts-Based Learning | Anissa Talahite-Moodley, Assistant Professor, Teaching Stream, Historical and Cultural Studies, UTSC; Natasha Shokri, OISE, UTSG; Sandy Saad-Smith, Doris McCarthy Gallery, UTSC
Reflection by: Inga Breede
Session Highlight:
The key theme from both sessions was the effectiveness of experiential learning (EL). The first session was led by the Work Integrated Learning (WIL) Team in UTSC. WIL supports UTSC faculty who are interested in integrating partnership-based learning in their courses. This is done through in-class projects or in-community placements.
The second session was led by an instructor who fosters experiential learning grounded in art-based pedagogy. Students are encouraged to take their own photos and make connections with the course material. This type of activity is referred to as Pictologics, and is based on a photovoice-inspired methodology.
Key Takeaways:
It was interesting that in both cases, a media-based assessment is used. In session 1, one of the ways that students are assessed is from a self-reflection, recorded on video. In the second session, photography is the main medium used for assessment.
Session information: AI and the Future of Learning: The Enchanted, the Perplexed, and the Generative Critical Thinkers (Keynote) | Paolo Granata, Associate Professor of Book and Media Studies, St. Michael’s College, University of Toronto
Reflection by: Anna Limanni
Session Highlight:
There were several key messages from Prof. Granata's talk that resonated with me, especially as they relate to teaching and learning in higher education.
AI and the uncomfortable truth about assessment
For instance, he argued that the real elephant in the room when it comes to teaching and learning is not AI itself, but the “stigma, trust gap, and double bind” surrounding its use. Universities are simultaneously embracing AI adoption while often discouraging it in practice (especially for students). This sends mixed and often contradictory signals to students who are then, often justifiably, reluctant to admit to using AI, even when it may support their learning.
More fundamentally, Prof. Granata suggests that AI is exposing a deep vulnerability in our educational model. This model has long relied on evaluating outputs (the final product) as a proxy for the underlying cognitive process. However, as Prof. Granata points out, any text-based assignment submitted asynchronously can now be generated by AI. In this current context, the existing model becomes increasingly untenable and raises the question: what forms of assessment can genuinely capture how well a student thinks (with or without AI)?
Master it first, then delegate it
A key insight that extends the above concern is his emphasis on competence as foundational. He stresses that meaningful engagement with AI (and meaningful learning more generally) depends on prior knowledge and domain expertise. Without this competence, students cannot critically evaluate AI outputs or move beyond surface-level understanding. This reinforces the idea that assessment cannot simply focus on whether an answer is produced, but should instead aim to surface the type of understanding that makes judgment possible.
AI is not a replacement, it is a multiplier
A final insight related to the above is the paradox that AI use can result in either cognitive atrophy or cognitive augmentation. What makes the difference in outcome, according to Prof. Granata, is how AI is used. If students engage with AI just to generate answers, they risk becoming cognitively lazy. And, because AI outputs are polished and convincing, they can fall victim to the illusion of competence. On the other hand, active engagement with AI (such as using AI as a conversational partner or Socratic tutor) can lead to cognitive augmentation and creativity.
In this sense, AI acts as a multiplier of whatever the user brings to it (i.e., an extension of “garbage In, garbage out”).
Key Takeaways:
To further my own development, I would like to explore how to use AI as a dialectical partner to support the development of domain expertise, including reading Granata’s book and related work.
I also want to learn more about designing assessments that foreground process, judgment, and disciplinary competence, rather than polished outputs easily generated by AI. I am particularly interested in what these assessments can look like in practice and how existing assessments might be adapted for this new context.
Want to learn more?
Take a look at:
- Professor Granata's substack, Generative Thinkers
- Professor Granata's book, Generative Knowledge: Think, Learn, Create with AI, available through UTL or for purchase
Session information: Exploring Augmented Reality in a Language Class | Katarzyna Peric, Sessional Lecturer, Department of French, Faculty of Arts & Science, UTSG; Vasuki Shanmuganathan, Sessional Lecturer, Department of Arts, Culture and Media, UTSC
Reflection by: Marisa Curmi
Session Highlight:
A key point that stuck with me was that the value of AR isn't really in the technology itself, but in how it can encourage students to actively engage with the content. When learners can move at their own pace and interact with the material, engagement tends to increase naturally.
Key Takeaways:
I can think more intentionally about how to make the projects I work on feel less passive, which is always a focus for me, but this session was a helpful reminder of what that can look like in practice. Even without AR, there are simple ways to build in that same sense of exploration and participation.
Want to learn more?
If you are interested, don’t miss Techknowfile 2026, where the team will share more about this project: Student engagement and piloting Augmented Reality-enhanced classrooms
Session information: Reclaiming Course Design in the Age of Generative AI | Christine Wong, Assistant Professor, Teaching Stream, Department of Health and Society, UTSC
Reflection by: Yun Wu
Session Highlight:
The session was led by Prof. Christine Wong, who shared her approach to course design that integrates AI tools to enhance both teaching and student learning. She explained how AI can be embedded into different stages of the learning process, from content delivery to active student engagement.
For example, she uses AI-generated image errors as a teaching strategy, asking students to critically evaluate and correct mistakes to strengthen their understanding. She also participates in the Cogniti AI Tutor project, where her course uses an AI tutor to provide students with additional learning support.
In addition, Prof. Wong uses NotebookLM to generate AI-based podcasts that make complex topics and course readings more accessible. She also used vibe coding with Claude to design two interactive games, which are used to introduce new concepts to the students in a more engaging, experiential way.
Key Takeaways:
I was inspired by Prof. Wong’s approach to integrating multiple AI tools across different stages of course design. Her approach made me reflect on how AI is reshaping course design strategies and practices in positive ways, particularly in supporting student learning while also improving AI literacy in academic settings.
I also resonated with the vibe coding in Claude that Prof. Wong mentioned, as I have been exploring vibe coding to experiment with automation approaches that improve my workflow. It is encouraging to see how vibe coding can be applied in diverse ways, including course design, and how it can support more meaningful engagement and creativity in learning and teaching contexts.
Want to learn more?
Explore more about the UofT Cogniti virtual AI Tutor: Artificial Intelligence Virtual Tutor Initiative