How we know what we know about the outside world, and even ourselves, is shaped by how we perceive it, which includes our previous experiences, language, and culture. Language constrains how we externalize questions to others, and to a degree, how we think about questions and conceptualize frameworks, systems, and reality. This has direct consequences for how we frame academic questions and what answers we choose to discover. Indeed, even within academic disciplines, there are differences across cultures and languages. In a global society, it is important that academic work develop these cross-cultural competencies, which include exploring different ways of thinking. Pedagogically, we must understand the linguistic and cultural landscape that many students navigate. For bilingual students, the barrier to communication may not be solely one of grammar, but it may be an entire perceptual framework. In this talk, I explore how operating in different languages or cultures affects our models of reality, and how different modes of operating affects how individuals are perceived and able to navigate the world. I further discuss how this can impact perceptions of authenticity across linguistic and cultural contexts. I consider how these concepts have implications for pedagogy, especially in the sciences, and examine ways we can navigate this landscape to engage with students more fully.

As Lutheran institutions of higher education navigate current challenges, it is essential to revisit and reenvision the epistemological foundations that inform our academic work. This proposal draws on the rich traditions of Lutheran epistemology, namely the virtue of humility, in emphasizing the value of deliberate, contemplative, and community-oriented practices in the classroom. By combining modern educational technology with ancient spiritual wisdom, we can create a more thoughtful and engaged academic environment. We will explore the virtue of humility and its implications for academic work, discuss how to integrate the practice of listening from the Rule of St. Benedict into contemporary classroom settings, and examine the role of educational technology in enhancing contemplative learning practices.

This presentation is aimed at faculty, staff, and administrators from Lutheran institutions of higher education, as well as those from other faith traditions interested in contemplative pedagogy and the integration of technology in the classroom. By addressing the epistemological relevance of Lutheran traditions and key ecclesiastical themes that inform our academic pedagogy and proposing innovative practices for contemporary challenges, this presentation aligns closely with the conference theme of reimagining academic work and Lutheran epistemology in higher education.

How do we prepare public service teachers in a private (an very diverse) Lutheran university? As a higher education institution that prepares teacher candidates for work with all students they may encounter, we must walk the fine line between embracing and sharing our Lutheran beliefs, while also ensuring all belief systems are honored. There can be some tenets of a religious belief system that may run afoul of the standards and rules regarding the governmental licensing agency for each state. How do we balance this tightrope walk? First, we must understand that Culturally Responsive Teaching in rooted in neuroscience. When students do not feel safe in their learning environment or do not feel seen and valued, the fight or flight mechanism of their brains in impacted and learning shuts down. It is essential to prepare our students to create the safe learning environments needed for their students. We must lead our teacher candidates through the difficult process of diving deeply into our subconscious beliefs about differences among people. This work leads to difficult yet important conversations about how we think about this inner journey through the Lutheran lens.

This study used a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach to shed light on faculty’s perception of faith and learning. It was confirmed via a previously validated survey that faculty’s perceptions fall across three types of involvement: Initial, Interpersonal, and Institutional. Findings from the study found that the most impactful influencers are a faculty’s undergraduate institution (Christian vs. secular), and faculty’s belonging to a particular faith tradition. The qualitative focus group analysis affirmed the findings of the quantitative analysis, and provided two additional factors that impact faculty involvement in faith and learning: 1) enough time to connect faith and learning (CFL) and 2) institutional clarity in identifying methods/requirements of CFL. Subsequently, a year was spent co-leading new faculty in a Lutheran Faith and Learning seminar. Some new faculty expressed confusion regarding how to grade “faith.” Faculty often include scripture or a faith message in a weekly introduction to course content. The faith introduction is optional - as it is not graded. For CFL to improve academically, it is beneficial to include scripture connected to course content in graded student assignments. The quantitative and qualitative findings from my dissertation accompanied with a year of experience with new faculty allow for an interesting presentation; and hopefully for a robust round table discussion regarding how to integrate/connect scripture into course content. This presentation and roundtable should be epistemologically and practically beneficial for Lutheran faculty.

Description text goes hereMultiple perspectives on ways that Christian educators can help students of all ages engage with culture are identified. Combining secular current research on inclusive teaching practices (NAEYC, 2019) together with Biblical teachings that reflect God’s desire for us to treat others with equity and compassion (Romans 12: 2) are examined. Intertwining the research with Holy Scripture has an impact on current practices providing more depth in ways that Christians can engage with culture from multiple perspectives. Ferry (2023), refers to Richard Niebuhr’s book, Christ and Culture (1956), as a framework to better understand different perspectives on Christ (and Christians) and culture. Niebuhr identified five paradigms for Christ and culture: 1.Christ AGAINST Culture; 2. Christ OF Culture; 3. Christ ABOVE Culture; 4. Christ and Culture in PARADOX; 5. Christ the TRANSFORMER of Culture. The final perspective focuses on Christ as the transformer of culture which emphasizes the impact that Christians can have on culture. Through God’s saving grace, Christians can share the message of salvation through Christ in words and/or actions (Matthew 28: 19). This perspective reminds Christian educators of the responsibility to model humility, grace, compassion, kindness, sincerity, and forgiveness to others and recognize the life-changing impact this can have on individual students, families, communities, and the world (1 Timothy 4: 12). This transformative focus takes into account other perspectives in a more holistic approach on HOW Christians engage with culture in ways that are meaningful by serving God and living in Christ (Philippians 4:13).

At California Lutheran University, graduate students make up one-third of the student body. Yet, the campus resources are conspicuously more undergraduate-focused, which has made graduate students at CLU an isolated and invisible community of learners.

That doesn’t sound right. But what have we missed and what can we do now? To address these questions and this problem, at the Writing Center, we started a new initiative aimed at creating a physical and virtual space for graduate students, in hopes of creating connected experiences for graduate students.

On Saturdays, while the Library was closed, we opened up the Writing Center through the backdoor to the Library building for students to arrive. We hold meetings for the Graduate Writing Community in the enclosed Writing Center space and provide coffee, music, air, noise, and an inviting collaborative space to graduate students. The diverse graduate body reflects our local demographic composition and the diverse experiences that had gone unnoticed and unheard. A community of CLU graduate students that we wanted to see is beginning to take shape, and we want to sustain the change and live up to our promise of connectedness on our campus.

This session will share with participants the stories–challenges and successes– that define this community and provide an example of community building and student-centered connected experiences to bitter support the graduate student population at any Lutheran college campus.

The Lutheran tradition’s place in theology seems assured, with generations of Lutheran thinkers leaving a legacy for generations of theologians to discuss and analyze. But is there a space for a Lutheran approach to literary analysis? My works seeks to answer “Yes!” to this question. In my project, I connect the central theme of free will in John Steinbeck’s East of Eden to the philosophical concept of “anxiety” as first theorized by Lutheran philosopher and theologian Søren Kierkegaard. In the journal he kept while writing East of Eden, John Steinbeck describes finding the “key” to his novel: the Hebrew term “timshel,” which roughly translates to “thou mayest.” In the text, Lee famously argues that the implication of this term is what “makes a man great” and “gives him stature with the gods.” With this key, Steinbeck aimed to unlock what he viewed to be the “basis of all human neurosis.” However, later critics viewed the novel’s most memorable character, Cathy Trask, as thwarting the novel’s central claim about the importance of free will. By utilizing Kierkegaard’s understanding of anxiety, I argue that Cathy not only fits within the novel’s focus on the ability to choose but serves as a demonic paragon for what happens when "timshel" is rejected. Such a reading not only reevaluates the novel’s thematic cohesion but also encourages a deeper analysis of Steinbeck’s artistic philosophy. Also, by utilizing Kierkegaard’s philosophy to analyze literature, I hope to encourage more interaction with the Lutheran intellectual tradition in the humanities.

In the description of this year’s conference theme Tom Christenson’s philosophical account of “Lutheran Epistemology” is referenced. To be blunt, I am in full agreement with Christenson’s “Lutheran Epistemological Reformation Principle” - a “pattern of thinking—[where] we criticize from a point of view that also stands in need of criticism.” I would like to take the opportunity with this paper and presentation to defend what I take to be the essence of Christenson’s account, apply this to the mission and responsibilities of contemporary Lutheran Colleges and Universities, and argue that the practice and method of Philosophy forms the foundation of this epistemology and approach to higher education. A part of this argument will be an examination of how we as faculty at Lutheran Colleges and Universities can be doing more to fulfill this responsibility at our institutions and to be helping our students develop their capacity to think philosophically. In caring deeply about the liberal arts and sciences we must help our students see that Philosophy (and the practice of “thinking philosophically”) is at the foundation of Lutheran Epistemology, of all intellectual activity, and thus all academic disciplines. To lose sight of this fundamental calling in favor of a tunnel vision focus on short term, job oriented, immediately practical courses of study is to ultimately lose sight of what is distinctive about the Lutheran quest for knowledge. If we do not understand the practice and importance of Philosophy then we will not be able to help our students develop in this practice and corresponding capacities and thus will fail to fulfill the calling of Lutheran higher ed.

William Placher’s Callings: Twenty Centuries of Christian Wisdom on Vocation details four historical periods in “Christian history when ‘calling’ has had different meanings.” Interestingly, Placher’s text was published in 2005, during what eventually may come to be recognized as a fifth historical era for the durable, yet mutable concept of calling. This latest renaissance of activity around the interrelated terms of vocation and calling has been driven by the Lilly Foundation’s massive PTEV (Programs for the Theological Exploration of Vocation) grants in 1999 and by the emergence of NetVUE (Network for Vocation in Undergraduate Education) in 2009. Although recent scholars have stretched our understanding of these terms and their applications in diverse ways, Luther’s reframing of these concepts around one’s spiritual vocation and external vocation remains a vital touchstone for this work. In contrast with the recent focus on undergraduate education, writing and discussion about the vocational formation of faculty members has occupied an understandably smaller role in this conversation. An even smaller subset of this conversation has focused on how faculty members’ vocational journeys can be understood as evolving across the life span. How can the language of vocation, particularly as shaped by Luther and Reformation understandings of this concept, provide a context for exploring the vocational formation of faculty members as they journey from newly hired, to mid-career, and onward through retirement? And how might the application of this language to the span of a career reframe the language itself?

Trust is central in Christian and Muslim relations and faculty and student interactions. Al Amana Centre in Muscat, Oman provides lessons on trust and trust building applicable to Lutheran higher education in North America. Lutheranism highlights the importance of trust coram Deo and coram mundo. Drawing upon Lutheran theological formularies and current research on the beliefs and practices of trust in Christian-Muslim relations at Radboud University in the Netherlands and at Al Amana Centre (House of Trust) in the Middle East, this presentation overviews the importance of trust as epistemology and praxis in Christian and Muslim encounters through the case study of Al Amana Centre for Lutheran higher education.

Friesenhahn Cave, stewarded by Concordia University Texas, is a world-renowned paleontological site and serves as a living laboratory, offering invaluable insights into climate change over millennia. Our science faculty has fostered collaborations across disciplines and with local museums, federal agencies, and other educational institutions to create a holistic approach to understanding climate change and our roles as stewards of creation. This multidisciplinary approach provides students with a rich, multifaceted learning experience. Geology students can analyze cave formations to reconstruct past climates. Biology students study fossilized remains such as mammoths, sabertooth cats, and rodents to understand biodiversity changes. Theology students explore the concept of creation care, connecting scientific findings with ethical and spiritual prospectives on environmental stewardship. History students cover the evolution of the cave from a predator den to a Prohibition-era storage facility. Our partners assist our faculty and students by providing historical and scientific context, encouraging community engagement and environmental advocacy, as well as offering hands-on experiences with fossils, artifacts, and exhibits. This integrated approach not only deepens students' knowledge of climate change and creation care beyond the limits of the classroom, but also cultivates critical thinking, interdisciplinary communication skills, and a sense of responsibility towards the environment. By using Friesenhahn Cave as a microcosm of bigger environmental issues, we demonstrate how local resources can be leveraged to address global challenges, inspiring the next generation of informed and engaged environmental stewards.

The Lutheran church has a progressive history with cultural inclusion that can be traced to the pre-antebellum period. Starting in the 1830s, the Lutheran church established congregations and ordained ministers of Black ancestry, such as Pastor Jehu Jones. These congregations served as a unique space for framing ways to worship while remaining connected to the sociocultural issues of the Black communities. Over the past two centuries Blacks have remained connected and impactful in Lutheran spaces such as academia. This provocation uses critical autoethnography of two Black Lutheran women serving at Lutheran academic institutions to reflect on the ontoepistemological of their respective identities shape the servantship in Lutheran colleges.

Filter bubbles, news/friend feeds, monetizing algorithms, artificial intelligence, and human nature combine to create a toxic situation where social media negatively impacts mental health and contributes to political and ideological extremism. Former Google ethicist and current executive director of the Center for Humane Technology, Tristan Harris, maintains that social media companies are shaping the thoughts, feelings, and behavior of people. “They are programming people,” he says. Ramsay Brown, CEO and founder of AI Responsibility Lab, maintains “A computer programmer who now understands how the brain works knows how to write code that will get the brain to do certain things…You don’t pay for Facebook. Advertisers pay for Facebook. You get to use it for free because your eyeballs are what’s being sold there.” Currently, there is no incentive for change. “Asking technology companies [and] content creators to be less good at what they do feels like a ridiculous ask,” states Gabe Zichermann, gamification expert and co-founder of Onward. Sharon Gray, who has taught Ethical Issues in Technology at Augustana University for over twenty years, discusses some of the issues contributing to toxic effects of social media. She also shares how some are working to combat those toxic effects, especially among youth.

In an era where most of humanity’s knowledge can be accessed on a cellular device, the call to liberal arts professors is (as we often read in university marketing literature) to teach students how to think effectively. And while we recognize the Scientific Method and logic as modes of thought that can be used to yield profitable answers, creative thought is often treated with an air of mystery or erroneously viewed as an aptitude that some possess and others do not (corporate-speak calls such people - “creatives” as if they were a different kind of human). But creative thought is an approach to problem-solving that can be learned and adopted by people in any field.

What does "teaching a critical historiography in the age of social media and popular culture" really mean? Are there historical examples that can shed light upon the off-cited trope of today's internet? Using examples of well-known primary sources, the talk will explore assumptions and revisions of history to demonstrate how students can learn to be more critical of what is published. Students spend about four hours a day on the internet through their cell phones. In contrast, they spend 3.3 hours a day in academic work. That means that the average student spends slightly over 12% of their day engaged in academic pursuits and about 16% on Tik Tok. For history, the concept of critical historiography is the centerpiece of academic pursuit. Student learning outcomes state that “students will evaluate and understand current issues in the light of the history preceding them through historiography and analysis.” In terms of the epistemological relevance of the tradition of Lutheran higher education this is “wonderment” or the “awe of discovery.” In this age of social media and popular culture, those born after 1990 are particularly affected. Sadly, the “wonder” of the internet became a place to posit “fake news” and millions of gigabytes of inaccurate and unproven theories. Primary sources and material artifacts are the foundation stone of history, and their analysis introduces inquisitiveness and the hunt for solutions, a type of thinking that refutes “fake news.”

The Lutheran church was born in a university setting. Martin Luther, working as an educator for most of his career, taught theology at Wittenburg University in Germany. He never intended to start a whole new church, only to react to what he had come to view as current teachings antithetical to his own reading of the scripture. He posted the 95 theses on the church door to generate discussion and debate. He tested his ideas among colleagues and students, gathering them around the table in his home, taking walks in the nearby gardens to exchange ideas. He translated the scriptures into the German language of the people, so they could join in the discussions, increase understanding, teach their young, and prepare for richer, fuller lives of service.

This is the model for the task of Lutheran higher education. Our universities are a place for those rich, deep, discussions, fuller growth and understanding of the world and our place in it. As Christenson (2004) discusses in Chapter VII, it is important to develop, nurture, and support a true “community of learners.”

How do our Lutheran colleges and universities meet these goals? For this paper, I have conducted a content analysis of the stated mission of the currently operating Lutheran colleges and universities in the U.S. to gain understanding of what they intend for students to achieve and become.

Anyone who has spent the last ten years or more teaching at a Lutheran institution of higher learning knows that the landscape is changing, and changing faster all the time. The impact of the Great Recession and its concomitant drop in the birth rate; the federal government’s attempts to regulate corrupt for-profit schools that also fundamentally changed the landscape for everyone; the decades-long decline in federal and state support for higher education; the massive difference in the rate of growth for university and family budgets; the steady decline in religious and denominational affiliation; and the successful campaign against disciplines that didn’t obviously and immediately lead to a job, as well as numerous other factors, have fundamentally and irrevocably changed how students and their parents see institutions of higher learning.

In this environment, 1) what does it mean to be a Lutheran institution of higher learning in the 2020s? 2) How do institutions currently live out their Lutheran identities in ways that are recognizable to students? 3) To what extent is an institution’s Lutheran identity an asset or a liability when it comes to recruiting and retaining students? 4) Are there likely additional potential changes in Lutheran institutions’ futures vis-à-vis their Lutheran identity?

In addition, what do these changes mean for august institutions like the Association of Lutheran College Faculties? How can/must institutions like ours adapt in order to survive?

Make certain to ask, “does it look like a church?” Methodist Episcopalian minister Elbert C. Conover advised Protestant congregations in _The Church Building Guide_ published in 1946. Writing amidst the rise of architectural modernism, Conover was dismayed by the movement’s use of minimalist aesthetics in the construction of Christian churches. In retrospect, Conover’s call for the assertion of traditional architectural typologies, or classifications of buildings based on well-established appearances over history, signaled a conflict that has only grown more pronounced with the arrival of the contemporary megachurch. Yet architectural historians have remained fairly uninterested in, and even resistant to, analysis of the megachurch as another chapter in the changing nature of Christian church architecture. Megachurches remain largely ignored as worthy of consideration as intentional forms. With their bland, often warehouse like appearances, seeming emphasis upon the number of parking spots over sanctuary, and overt determination to bring in as many people as possible, do megachurches offer anything significant or indeed surprising to the architectural narrative? I argue that if we adopt Tom Christenson’s Lutheran epistemological stance of wonder with its attendant themes of openness, expectation, and willingness to be wounded and to grow, we generate a framework for placing Megachurches in the compelling world of humanistic inquiry so vital to endeavors in church-related higher education.

When poet Dana Gioia and composer Morten Lauridsen first met in Los Angeles, the composer remembers sitting down at the piano to play and sing for his friend all of his newly composed Nocturnes. In fact, before they had actually met, Gioia had written to encourage the composer to take all the time he needed to create his Nocturnes (2005). Several years after their friendship had developed, Lauridsen took all of Gioia’s books of poetry and criticism to his rustic home on Waldron Island, a remote haven off the coast of Seattle. Lauridsen read all of Gioia’s oeuvre, choosing to focus especially on his poetry. Endeavoring to find a poem to set to music, he read systematically each volume backwards from the end to the beginning. As he concluded his perusal, Lauridsen read “Prayer,” the first poem in Gioia’s The Gods of Winter (1991). In a spark of creative realization, he knew immediately that it would be the poem he would set. Ceasing all other work, Lauridsen saw it as “an extraordinary poem”; its “layers of complexity” would allow him to create a fresh form and style to foreground Gioia’s compelling aesthetic vision of the mystery and the tragedy of loss. Drawing from interviews, letters, and emails, along with Gioia’s poem and Lauridsen’s composition, this paper argues for the vital role that the arts can play in epistemological inquiry. Regardless of one’s religious, denominational, or philosophical orientation, Tom Christenson’s twin notions of an “abiding sense of wonder” and an “openness to a sacramental view of reality” emphasize not only the interdependent nature of knowledge-making, they also call each of us to gain sustenance from the relational and complementary qualities enabled by the arts, to seek new truths for the faith journey, even in the midst of devastating loss.

The Lutheran church enjoys a rich body of music. Indeed, it has been known as the “singing church.” Why? It is because of Martin Luther himself. In contrast to the radical reformers Ulrich Zwingli who removed music from his church in Zürich, and John Calvin who restricted music only to that based upon scripture, such as the Psalms, Luther had a positive view of music: “Next to the Word of God, music deserves the highest praise.” Luther believed that music could convey the Gospel in a way that no other media can do, and after all, he said that he was not about to “let the Devil have all the good tunes.”

How could music do this? Luther believed that music is a different way of knowing—epistéme—Greek for “knowledge” or “understanding.” This paper will examine one of the greatest works of the composer who some call the “Fifth Evangelist,” Johann Sebastian Bach. In his monumental work, “The Passion According to Saint Matthew,” recounting the last week of Christ's life, Bach leads us along the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem to Golgotha in an epic pilgrimage. In it we are lifted up from one place and transported to another. We not only feel differently, but we think differently after music. Not words alone nor music alone, but both together become a vehicle of knowing. Music, too, is a form of Lutheran epistemology.

If we have countless answers already online, why do we learn? If we already know so much, why do we continue to create new knowledge? If we are already saved by grace, why haven’t we killed ourselves? It’s because we like living and we like learning! I propose C. Thi Nguyen’s philosophy of games can be mapped onto both epistemological and pedagogical strategies of striving towards divine thought. Through the salvation of Jesus Christ we know we have already achieved eternal salvation, and yet we are still here, seeking to discover more and more through the arts and sciences. Exploring new ways to access divinity through education and creation and love. We like the game of life too much to give it up too quickly for the reward.

Every discipline, including Lutheran epistemology itself follows this same philosophy: we know about God through our holy books, we know we will gain closer proximity to God in heaven, but we still strive to better understand our beliefs of and relationship to the divine through our epistemology, and how to share those beliefs through our pedagogy. Like a game, we can always get better by engaging with how to get better at playing. We will always have room to grow in our epistemology and pedagogy, but the reward isn’t a perfectly divine answer: it is striving and engaging with our community to become closure with truth.

The purpose of this talk is to explain the epistemology of computer science: knowledge by testing. Mathematics is built upon axioms and proofs; the scientific method on experimental observations. Computer scientists demonstrate correctness through rigorous testing where students must learn to design tests that reveal flaws in their algorithms. This unique skill requires resilience and a critical mindset. Our natural tendency is to create tests that support our work, rather than undermine it. The presentation will focus on the computer science disciplines of cyber security and artificial intelligence. Security researchers search for the “unknown unknowns” by creating tests that identify security vulnerabilities hidden deep within the code. Computer scientists validate machine learning models with carefully designed tests—a vital step as these models power AI programs that are often too complex to fully understand.

As a Lutheran educator, I find a connection between the computer science concept of testing and our faith in Jesus Christ. God’s Word generally describes two types of testing. In the first, we are warned against putting God to the test. The second type of testing is when God examines us or puts us to the test. Both types have parallels to computer science epistemology. However, this talk will explore my favorite application, where we “test” and see the goodness of God and His commandments.

In Taylor's A Secular Age he argues that the "immanent frame" of understanding the divine was partly replaced by scientific rationality, but that the tension between immanence and rationality remained. I contend that in the algorithmic age, we are witnessing a paradoxical dynamic wherein the pinnacle of scientific rationality - the inscrutability of AI systems created the conditions for re-enchantment or "re-immanence." The "black boxes" of algorithmic decision-making introduce a new mysticism, undermining both pure reason and pure faith. This has some positive potentialities, but it also creates a "metaphysical vertigo" that invites conspiratorial meaning-making and unreflective dogma. I want to explore how Lutheran universities and institutions can cultivate meaning and community in a world of inscrutable technological authority? What ethical frameworks can channel the enchanting nature of AI toward enriching our fullest human flourishing? How can we ensure that social, economic and political institutions use AI and algorithms in ways that respect human dignity, inclusive and ethical discourse, and mutual understanding. In particular, how can we create a space for the wonderment that AI advances deserve without succumbing to uncritical AI solutionism or authoritarianism that offers comforting solutions in a context of ever-increasing complexity.

The intellectual virtue of humility is seldom modeled in today’s public discourse, yet it is essential to effective engagement with diverse others and bringing about outcomes that benefit the common good; it is essential to building equitable relationships, healthy communities, and a nation and world in which *all* can truly flourish. We both graduated from St. Olaf College, which fostered our shared passion for a specifically Lutheran liberal arts educational mission. The educational mission of Lutheran institutions infers the importance of developing intellectual humility in our students, but not all courses or faculty do so with equal success or intentionality. In this presentation we discuss the “how” and “why” of the Humanities Tutorial, a year-long, interdisciplinary (English and Philosophy) first-year course we team-teach in the University Honors Program at CLU, and argue that Humanities disciplines have a unique ability to foster intellectual humility in students over those disciplines in which there are clear(er) right and wrong answers. By the end of each year, many of our students share powerful and empowering insights they’ve achieved from our course about themselves and others, and about the nature of - and distinctions between - knowledge and wisdom, ignorance and intellectual humility. Their insights have led us to see more clearly that educational systems and disciplines that train students to “find the right answer” lead them to think of academic, professional, and personal success in terms of “being right” - an assumption more likely to damage than build strong relationships and communities.

The 11.30.22 release of ChatGPT, an AI tool developed by Open AI for generating text in response to prompts, sent educators scrambling to respond to its potentially disruptive impact, both negative and positive. Newer version releases and other generative AI tools, such as DALL-E for creating images and Synthesia for creating videos, have caused further consternation. Augustana University’s Center for Excellence in Teaching and Scholarship pulled together resources and articles (available at https://tinyurl.com/ChatGPTresources) and sponsored a forum in January with presenters from computer science, English, journalism, and the Writing Center. That summer, a team of faculty began developing suggested syllabus language. Despite the challenges these new generative AI tools present, they make the case for a strong liberal arts education. Now, more than ever, society needs individuals who can discern truth and meaning from falsehoods and nonsense. This session will provide an opportunity for participants to discuss how they and their institutions are responding to generative AI.

This presentation looks at how artificial intelligence (AI) will impact the principles and guiding philosophy of the NECU contained in Rooted and Open. AI creates new opportunities and technologies that will redefine the landscape of higher education and will force faculty and institutions to critically evaluate how use of these technologies as part of the learning experience may affect the core principles of the Lutheran intellectual tradition. It is possible that traditional paradigms may have to be revisited and modified as part of this process. AI usage will also create new opportunities for service and student development. Lutheran institutions can leverage these opportunities to reach existing student populations in radically new ways. These opportunities may also allow for new student groups to benefit from higher education and the distinct approach used by NECU institutions.

This round table exercise will allow faculty space to collaborate on new teaching practices for a new generation (Gen Z) of college students. COVID-19 and other “unprecedented times” have severely impacted Gen Z students and the learning environment. In the midst of teaching a new generation, we will discuss innovative ways to engage with a new college student demographic.

Roundtable Learning Objectives:

1) Practical teaching skills for a practical generation of students;

2) Techniques for using tech with a high-tech student demographic;

3) Creating a classroom atmosphere that encourages student achievement for a new generation of students.