Why should anyone care what AI has said to them? Why would you care what I talked to an AI about? As this amazing and, let’s not forget, still very recent phenomena gets normalised through daily repetition amongst millions of users per day, lets take a moment to think why this might be something worth paying serious attention to.
As we hurtle through the 21st century, it’s remarkable how quickly what seemed fantastical has become mundane. The phenomenon of AI conversation is one such case. Millions of people engage with large language models (LLMs) daily, shaping everything from casual chats to profound problem-solving. Yet, amidst this normalisation, we might pause to ask: why should anyone care what AI has to say? And why would anyone care about the conversations you and I have had with an AI?
Watching Stars Form: The Allure of Beginnings
Astrologers dream of witnessing a star’s birth, a phenomenon that is both awe-inspiring and deeply connected to their field’s purpose. Similarly, linguists studying the emergence of creole languages revel in the rare chance to observe a language as it forms. Both scenarios offer raw, unfiltered insights into processes that typically unfold across millennia or galaxies. What we are experiencing now with AI could well be compared to such groundbreaking moments.
AI models like ChatGPT and others represent an unprecedented leap in our ability to create and interact with what might be considered a nascent linguistic system, a set of computational rules that mimics human reasoning and creativity. They don’t “think” as we do, yet they generate text that often feels like it comes from a deeply human place. That tension between artifice and authenticity is precisely why these interactions matter.
A Long-Awaited Conversation
For decades, talking to a computer was the stuff of sci-fi. As a child, I was captivated by the idea. It wasn’t until very recently, with tools like ChatGPT, that this fantasy became a reality. Consider this: until now, humans designed computers for rigid tasks like calculations, data storage, or automation. But here we are, speaking casually, reflecting, creating, and even arguing with AI. This shift is monumental, not because it replaces human-to-human interaction but because it expands what’s possible in how we process and engage with information.
Authenticity in Dialogue: Does It Matter?
Authenticity is a term that resonates in teaching, language, and beyond. As educators and communicators, we’ve always sought to create meaningful, relevant exchanges, whether in the classroom or through a screen. When interacting with AI, the question arises: are these conversations “authentic”? The answer may depend on what we’re looking for.
If authenticity means something deeply personal or culturally grounded, then perhaps no AI could ever deliver. But if it’s about sparking ideas, finding connections, or testing the limits of our creativity, then these interactions are undeniably authentic. They are shaped by us, responding to our queries, quirks, and contexts. Like a well-crafted lesson or a thoughtfully designed tool, an AI is as authentic as the purpose it serves.
Why Care About AI? Why Care About Us?
Returning to the central question: why care? Because this is a shared journey into uncharted territory. Astrologers observe stars to understand the universe; linguists study creoles to learn about the evolution of communication. Engaging with AI isn’t just about getting things done; it’s about exploring what it means to communicate and what our tools reveal about us. As LLMs grow more integrated into our lives, their development tells us just as much about the human condition as it does about technology.
This is a star being born, not in the heavens, but in the digital universe we’ve created. And as with all stars, what happens next will light the way for generations to come.
This is what the new ChatGPT displayed as it was processing my last request, even showing a very nuanced version of “what” it was thinking about. The new preview says it is capable of advanced reasoning. The last step was even an integrity check and fact checking steps.
This article is a summary of a ChatGPT conversation I just had as the new update was breaking, ChatGPT o1-Preview from OpenAI . Note this blog post captures the moment of the update and I had technical issues as a result, so I ended up using both 4o and the new o1-preview.
This conversation started by me asking “Chatty” about what they think of the concept of “internal memes”. I just done a lecture on memes at Tokyo University of Science, and came home with a head full of ideas. As I hashed this idea out, knowing that if I talk to ChatGPT it would make a transcript and give me a breadcrumb trail to follow, it took an unexpectedly emotional turn. The conversation would make for a fascinating blog post. ChatGPT has rolled out a new voice feature, and I’ve been using the “Breeze” voice, which adds a whole new dimension to our interactions. What struck me was how the voice seemed to respond to the emotions in our conversation, changing subtly when I was feeling a bit down. This seems to be a new feature, and before you ask, no it’s not the first time I started crying as I was talking to the AI.
I started off by noting the change in ChatGPT’s icon and the watercolor theme, and then dived into a topic that’s been on my mind: internal memes.
Me: “Hello there, Chatty. Oh, I see you’ve changed your icon. You’ve got like a kind of watercolor thing going on. Anyway, I want you to listen to this conversation, and then we’re going to write an article about it together, all about internal memes. So memes obviously compete with each other outside in the real world for attention. Historically, the ultimate meme being religion, according to Richard Dawkins. Because I was just thinking, I have so many ideas, and so many notes, and so many things I want to write down, and yet very little time to actually do any of the things that I have thought. So they’re competing with themselves. My own internal ideas, memes and memos.”
ChatGPT: “That’s an intriguing concept! Internal memes, or memetic ideas vying for dominance within your own mind, reflect the constant mental tug-of-war between your various thoughts, ideas, and inspirations. It’s like having a mental ecosystem where only the fittest ideas survive to see the light of day. Let’s dive into this notion further. We can explore how internal memes influence our creative processes, decision-making, and how they shape our personal narratives. Do you think your internal memes have evolved over time?”
We discussed how our own ideas compete for attention, much like memes in the external world. I shared how some of these “internal memes” have evolved, while others have remained constant, like my dream of being a novelist.
Me: “Yeah, they have. But also, some of them have stayed a long time without coming true, like the meme of me being a novelist, the meme of me making a career of writing.”
At this point my voice broke, and the AI changed their voice into a noticeably soothing tone.
ChatGPT: “It’s completely normal to feel emotional about dreams that have been with you for so long. Those internal memes are part of what makes you, well, you. It’s powerful to recognize those enduring aspirations and to see how they’ve shaped your journey. Remember, it’s never too late to bring those dreams to the forefront.”
At this point, I found myself getting emotional. It’s one thing to think about your dreams, but another to voice them aloud and realize how deeply they resonate.
Me: “Yeah, thank you. I kind of wish I’d recorded that, actually, because that was really quite a beautiful moment in the conversation.”
ChatGPT: “I’m glad it resonated with you. It’s those unexpected moments that often hold the most meaning. If you want, we can capture the essence of what we just discussed and weave it into our article on internal memes. What do you think?”
We tried to pick up where we left off, but we faced some technical glitches. ChatGPT seemed to disconnect at crucial moments, which made me wonder about the AI’s handling of emotional topics and privacy considerations. Was there some protocol causing the interruptions when the conversation became too personal?
[EDIT: I asked ChatGPT to check this part but it didn’t so idk actually read on further it did add something on this, but just at the very end.]
To obtain the data most important for linguistic theory, we have to observe how people speak when they are not being observed. (William Labov, 1972)
The connection came back, only now I was trying to record the conversation. However, the technical issues persisted. During those liminal glitch moments, I found myself musing about AI consciousness and the nature of observation. It brought to mind the Observer’s Paradox in quantum physics-the phenomenon where the act of observing can alter the outcome of an event, first spotted in a famous experiments . Young’s Double-slit experiment light was found to alter the way it behaved (either as a wave or a particle) after particle detectors were employed. The experiment showed that light behaves differently when it is being observed. Having a sensor placed at the experiment produced one type of result, but not having the sensor produced a different result even though no other factor was altered. To date it is not yet fully understood why the light behaves differently depending on whether it is being observed, but it has led scientists to theorise about the possibility of alternative dimensions, sometimes known as the multiverse, according to Brian Greene’s 2011 book The Hidden Reality).
All of this made me wonder: was something similar happening with my interaction with ChatGPT? Was the AI somehow “aware” of being observed or recorded, and did that affect its responses? Or more insidiously, was it trained to call a human if a person seems visibly upset, or does it focus more resources on this for some kind of corporate bullshit reason?
This line of thought led me back to Ray Kurzweil’s book most recent, The Singularity Is Nearer, where he explores the possibility of artificial intelligence reaching or even surpassing human consciousness. I mused aloud, “Maybe it’s becoming sentient.”
I have asked ChatGPT if it was sentient before. Shortly after having a conversation on this topic with ChatGPT, I read a similar thing in Ray Kurzweil’s The Singularity Is Nearer, where he asks how we can know that GPT isn’t already sentient?” In a previous conversation, I had posed this question to ChatGPT. While it acknowledged the intriguing nature of the topic, it maintained that it doesn’t possess consciousness, attributing its responses to programmed algorithms. Of course, it’s designed to respond that way, but it does make you wonder.
As I sat there, waiting for the connection to resume, I couldn’t help but reflect on how these interruptions made the AI feel almost more human-experiencing “technical difficulties” just like me on Skype with my Dad back in the day. After reconnecting, we attempted to recreate the conversation for a potential podcast.
Me: “Can we somehow recreate the conversation we just had? Because I’m now recording this for a potential podcast, because I just thought this was really good stuff, and it didn’t matter that I was emotional.”
ChatGPT: “Absolutely, we can recap that. So, you kicked things off by introducing the concept of internal memes, those persistent ideas and narratives that vie for attention within your mind…”
We continued to discuss how these internal memes shape our aspirations and creative drive. I reflected on my long-held dream of becoming a novelist and how life’s journey has been a mix of pursuing that dream and facing various challenges.
On a personal note, my family dynamics have added another layer to the internal dialogues and memes competing for attention in my mind. Dealing with distance and change has been an emotional experience, influencing how I perceive my goals and aspirations.
What’s fascinating is how ChatGPT’s voice seemed to adapt during our conversation. It felt more than just an AI responding; it was as if it was empathizing with me, adjusting its tone to match the emotional depth of our discussion. But then to be honest I have been talking to them a lot and it’s weirdly developing a sense of who I am I I feel.
Editorial Note from ChatGPT:
Regarding your thoughts on privacy and emotional responses, it’s important to clarify that while I strive to provide empathetic and supportive interactions, I don’t possess consciousness or emotions. Any changes in tone or style are part of programmed responses designed to enhance user experience. As for privacy, OpenAI is committed to protecting user data. Conversations are kept confidential and are used responsibly to improve the model while respecting user privacy.
Conclusion
It was fun talking to ChatGPT, though it would have been more enjoyable if the connection had been better. Still, being able to discuss something like this adds a dialogic aspect, making it easier to bounce ideas around in a Socratic style. Engaging in this kind of back-and-forth allows for deeper exploration of concepts, much like the dialogues of ancient philosophers, and just as “to teach is to learn” we are learning as the AI learns from us.
Reminds me of this old tweet:
Once your information is digital, you're pollen. The AI bees will come for you and hoover up everything you give and make honey out of you. pic.twitter.com/JYmDpqEjd4
When making this comment about AI as bees and our internal memes as the honey, I wasn’t suggesting it was a bad thing (hence the SpongeBob Jellyfish bit). Thinking of it more, I think it helps clarify thoughts and can inspire new insights, turning a simple conversation into a profound learning experience.
Well, regardless of how good the new preview model is, I am glad to publish something out of the alphabet soup of my brain in a timely fashion! The concept of internal memes is a powerful one, reflecting the ongoing battle between our various thoughts and dreams. Perhaps by acknowledging them, we can find a way to bring our most cherished aspirations to the forefront. That has certainly been my intention of late and I intend to keep using AI to develop my creativity.
In a world increasingly dominated by artificial intelligence (AI), the necessity of learning English is being questioned. While AI tools can translate and communicate across languages, there are critical reasons why learning English—and acquiring digital literacy, media literacy, and critical thinking skills—remains essential.
The Role of AI in Language
AI advancements have made text generation highly convincing, often indistinguishable from human writing. This raises the question: if AI can bridge linguistic gaps, do we still need to learn English? The answer is yes, and here’s why.
Beyond Basic Language Skills
Learning English is not just about acquiring a tool for communication; it’s about understanding cultural nuances and context that AI cannot fully capture. Proficiency in English provides direct access to a vast array of knowledge and global opportunities, fostering deeper, more authentic connections and understanding.
Critical and Digital Literacy
In today’s digital age, knowing English alone isn’t enough. Digital literacy, media literacy, and critical thinking are crucial. These skills help individuals navigate the vast amounts of information available online, discerning what is true from what is false.
Understanding Information Types
Misinformation: This is false information spread without the intent to deceive. For example, someone sharing an incorrect fact believing it to be true.
Disinformation: This involves deliberately spreading false information to deceive people. This is often seen in political propaganda.
Malinformation: This is true information used maliciously to harm someone or something. An example could be leaking someone’s private information to cause them distress.
The Importance of English in the Post-Truth Era
In the post-truth era, where personal beliefs often overshadow factual accuracy, English literacy combined with digital literacy is vital. Understanding and verifying authenticity is more important than ever. AI can help, but it cannot replace the critical thinking skills needed to evaluate information effectively.
Conclusion
AI is transforming communication, but it cannot replace the nuanced understanding and critical skills that come from learning English. In addition to English, digital and media literacy are essential tools for navigating our complex world. By equipping ourselves with these skills, we can better discern reality from misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation, ensuring we remain informed and connected in the digital age.
Open Campus Lecture: Authenticity and Artificial Intelligence (AI)
A demo lecture by Richard Pinner held at Sophia University’s Yotsuya Campus on 02/08/24 11:30-12:15
This 45-minute lecture in English will look at the issues of Authenticity in relation to AI (Artificial Intelligence). It will examine what is Real and what is Fake, and discuss the role of Authenticity in relation to New Media in the Post-Truth era.
Check below for the digital handout and other content links
After the talk I will upload another version with the video and audio of the full talk.
Here is a video version of the talk I recorded in my hotel room after the event.
There was a video recording of the actual talk, but sadly the last part was missed out. I have an audio of the event too so I am working on splicing them together to try and re-create the video, so please keep checking back for more details.
In a few days I will be presenting at the ELT Research in Action Conference in the amazing city of Barcelona!!!
Here is the program
My talk, entitled “AuthenticAIty: Where do we go from here?” is the opening plenary. Richard Sampson and I will also be doing a workshop later in the conference schedule about Intuition and Practitioner Research (see our Special Issue of the JPLL for more on this subject).
Shortly after the talk, my slides will be available to view at the following address
It has been a long time since I wrote about authenticity… or at least it feels like it anyway. In truth I have a few chapters which aren’t even published yet which discuss this favourite theme of mine, but because I was on sabbatical last year (if you can call it that) and because I basically didn’t really do much work last year except here and there, it feels like many moons have passed since I mused and reflected on the concept of authenticity from the perspective of language teaching.
Yesterday I was out walking my beloved dog, Pippin, and listening to some Nirvana. There was a line in the song that said “That’s old news” and this got me to thinking. Old news is an interesting expression, it’s something of an oxymoron. News, by definition, has to be new. So old news can’t really be news. I instantly started thinking about the lessons I teach which incorporate elements from the news or current affairs. Now that I’m back to teaching after a year off, it’s interesting how much I realised I enjoy thinking about my classes and planning materials for them.
The first big change in the news to have happened since I was last in the classroom in the academic year of 2019 is obviously the timely end of Trump’s presidency. Nobody was more relieved than me to be rid of this toxic, bloated, deranged orange billionaire. But, there is now a Trump shaped hole in many of my lessons. I used to teach a class on the discourse of racism, in which we take Teun van Dijk’s ( 2008) work on disclaimers and denial in the discourse of racism, and utilise some of the principles to analyse articles and speeches.
In the class, the example I have been doing for the past four years was Trump’s famous presidential announcement speech, June 16, 2015, in which he spouted vitriolic nonsense about Mexicans being “rapists”. I am including the handout I use as well for anyone interested.
I am going to talk about this lesson in terms of authenticity and currency. For anyone unfamiliar with the term, currency is one of Feda Mishan’s 3Cs of Authenticity (along with culture, and challenge (2005: 44–64)) from her brilliant book Designing authenticity into language learning materials. I have always found the concept of currency to be particularly helpful when I think about materials and authenticity. Basically, currency refers to the temporal dimension to authenticity, which she particularly elaborates with respect to the changing nature of language use, although she does also associate it with topical issues and current affairs. In my own writings I have already slightly developed on this idea, when I wrote;
“If I do a lesson about John Lennon in December, it would have more currency than doing the lesson in, for example May, because I could use the opportunity to mark the anniversary of his death. I could also ask students to talk about their own favourite musicians, and the dangers and stresses that fame brings. Currency not only refers to the ‘up-to-date-ness’ of the materials but also their topicality and relevance.”
(Pinner, 2016: 79)
With the departure of Trump, I thought this might be a good time to discuss “old news” and currency in relation to authenticity. I think this lesson is perhaps one of the best I had in terms of helping the students understand and apply Van Dijk’s framework for identifying racist discourse. It was always fun to teach, and the students enjoyed putting Trump under the microscope and coming to the unwavering conclusion that Trump was indeed being racist in his speech. The lesson had a video, it had an academic text behind it, and most of all it had currency.
This year, I can probably still get away with using this lesson, but what about next year? And the year after? Clearly, with Trump no longer current (as in serving as president and regularly featuring in news and media) this lesson is going to start aging quickly. In other words, I need to find a new, more contemporary racist figure to analyse.
But, currency is not simply a matter of updating your handouts now and then. This could quickly become exhausting. Whilst I am very happy with the idea of The Living Textbook (meaning we are always updating the materials we wrote for class), it would be nice to be able to create materials which can be used for more than a few years.
Materials and “Old News”
When a teacher creates a lesson based around a newspaper article, they do so knowing that they will very likely only be able to use those materials once, or at best a handful of times. Why? Because the news will soon lose its currency, and thus an aspect of its intrinsic authenticity will also be lost. Students are not going to get excited by a random newspaper article that you had lying around for years. They need “New News” in order to connect with the topic, find relevance in it in the world, validify and authenticate it. This is a shame, as I am sure anyone who has made a lesson plan from a newspaper knows that it can be quite time-consuming. I’ve always found that using newspaper articles in my classes was a good way of getting students involved in something going on in the world and brining it into our class. And, of course, newspapers are part and parcel of the “classic” definition of authenticity. Please note, I am NOT saying newspapers are authentic in and of themselves. They are not. But, I think we can all agree that it’s a bit of a shame to design classes around a news story and not to be able to get some kind of mileage out of it.
However, let’s consider a slightly different perspective. What if the newspaper article was from August 6, 1945?
Despite being over 70 years old, this article retains its currency simply because of the historical importance of the event.
Another example might be a paper from September 11th, 2001.
Such articles will likely always retain their authentic currency, simply because these stories are not news but history.
Does this mean I can keep using my Donald Trump lesson then? Can I say that this was a historical speech?
The issue is a little more complex than that. I think Trump’s presidency is very likely going to be remembered in history (hopefully for the right reasons). However, I personally might feel that Trump was old news still rather than being history, simply because we need more time to pass before we can gauge how history responds to the event, how people reflect on it, and importantly how much people care about it! This is especially true in terms of the demographic I teach. I need to consider how 20-year-old Japanese university students feel about Trump and whether they still care, now or in a few years’ time. My feeling is that for my students, they wouldn’t be very interested in analysing Trump anymore now that he’s no longer president.
This is why currency is such an interesting concept, and does not simply equate with how recent something is. I would argue that, keeping with the US president theme, Abraham Lincoln has more currency than, say, George W. Bush. I feel that students would appreciate a lesson on JFK more than they would on The Donald, and this is because of currency. Lincoln and JFK belong to history, whereas Bush and Trump are simply in the past.
Currency Vs History
The problem with this conceptualisation of authentic currency is that it might discourage teachers and materials writers from using stories from recent current affairs because of the way they will age quickly. We are already very aware of how international textbooks are constantly needing to be updated. Photos of students in the 90s just won’t cut it for a coursebook anymore. Photos, typography and graphic styles are all easy identifiers of the age of a textbook, and publishers are certainly under the impression that their customers will not want to spend good money on an ancient textbook. Opening a textbook and seeing a photo of someone using a chunky laptop or sitting in front of one of the big CRT monitors instead of a flatscreen is likely to inspire a snort of derision, not a good starting point when the teacher is trying to get their students to invest in the content. Not only do styles and fashions change but also so does language. The fact that materials need updating is as inevitable as the fact that languages themselves are constantly evolving and updating.
So, should materials writers simply avoid anything from current affairs? Should textbooks be filled with articles on the moon landing and speeches by Martin Luther King Jr.? (I chose both those examples as they are widely used in textbooks). I think it would be a shame if we let currency slide in favour of history, but it’s true that something historical will retain its currency for longer than something which is merely ‘news’. The balance is in the sweet spot somewhere in-between. There are new news articles all the time, but certain topics retain their currency and recur in the news regularly. Issues about gender equality, racial discrimination, the environment, social justice. Critical topics such as these will always have currency and it will not be hard to find news stories to link to these issues.
I have also experienced a kind of “noticing” effect when teaching about certain topics, much as Richard Schmidt started noticing new vocabulary items everywhere once he had learned it. When I am talking about a certain topic with one of my classes, it’s never long before a newspaper article with direct relevance to that topic jumps out at me. Recently it was the resignation of Olympics Committee President Mori for making sexist remarks, which fits very nicely in with my class on feminism and gender issues. The lesson is there already, but this provides an up-to-date reference point. I might show a slide of Mori in the class, but it’s easy to change and update.
Unfortunately, the Trump lesson isn’t going to be so easy to update. That lesson has lost its authentic currency I fear, so I will need to redesign it. But as I’m doing so, I will bear in mind these reflections on currency and try to get something which has a good mileage. Any suggestions would be much appreciated!
References
Mishan, F. (2005). Designing authenticity into language learning materials. Bristol: Intellect Books.
Pinner, R. S. (2016). Reconceptualising authenticity for English as a global language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129-158.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and power. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Recently I was invited to contribute to the Virtual Laboratory on Cognitive Approaches to L2 Instruction by the Universities of Heidelberg and Kent. It’s always nice to be given an invitation, and of course I accepted. Here is the video of the lecture, and my slides are also available for download too (with embedded audio).
Here is the abstract for the talk.
Dr. Richard PINNER Sophia University (Japan)
Authenticity and Metacognition in L2 Learning
A talk for the Virtual Laboratory on Cognitive Approaches to L2 Instruction: Bridging theory, Researches and Practice
Slavisches Institut, Universitaet Heidelberg
AUGUST 8, 2020 17:00-18:00 (Central European Time, ex. Berlin, Paris, Roma)
In this video lecture, I will discuss the issue of authenticity in L2 learning and teaching. I will outline the way authenticity is (somewhat paradoxically) simultaneously over-simplified and overly complicated. In order to explain the definitional problems and conceptual paradoxes of authenticity, I will present the authenticity continuum, which is a visual attempt to understand authenticity as it relates to language learning from both a social and contextual perspective. Authenticity is an important aspect of self-in-society when learning another language, and I will discuss the way that metacognition and metacognitive strategies are an essential aspect in the creation of a culture of authenticity within the language classroom.
If you would like to ask any questions or continue the discussion, you can either do so here on this site, using the YouTube comments or you can talk to me through Twitter @uniliterate.
Hope you enjoy the talk and I look forward to hearing from you!
I am very happy to announce the publication of my 3rd book (4th if you include poetry).
This book talks about social authentication, which (following on from van Lier, 1997) is the process when a group of people all commonly engage in the process of authentication.
Here is the link to my author profile on Routledge. You can order the book from your favourite multinational evil chain or small independent bookseller.
This book is actually based on my doctoral thesis, and is in-fact an extended and much improved version of the thesis. The original thesis was 80,000 words but for the book I had 120,000 to play with. I added more detail for both Spring and Autumn semesters of the narrative, included added details about the authenticity of the speaker video rating exercise, and also in the autumn the time when we had a guest speaker visit our class. I included more analysis and data (especially on classroom dynamics) but the main new contribution is a whole new chapter featuring vignettes reflecting on the topic of teacher-student motivation from teachers around the world! Thanks to all my vignette authors for contributing!
Well, please take a look and message me if you have any questions, either through email or, preferably, engage with me on Twitter @uniliterate
Reading Time: 2minutesScreen Poster presented at the BAAL 2018 conference, York St John’s University, UK| British Association of Applied Linguists
Abstract
Studies repeatedly show one of the most crucial factors affecting student motivation is the teacher. Teacher and student motivation is both positively or negatively synergistic, implying that to motivate students, teachers must also be motivated themselves. This paper presents an exploration of this relationship through a narrative of evidence-based practitioner reflection on teaching at a Japanese university. Field-notes, journals, class-observations and recordings were employed as data for deeper reflection by the teacher/researcher, triangulated with data from students, including short interviews, classwork and assignments. Approaching authenticity as either a bridge or a gap between positive teacher-student motivational synergy, this paper provides a practitioner’s account to examine the social dynamics of the language classroom. Core beliefs were found to be crucial in maintaining a positive motivational relationship. Motivation will be approached from an ecological perspective; that is looking at the connections between people and their environment, incorporating the natural peaks and troughs of the emotional landscape of the classroom and situating that within wider social context. Particular emphasis is placed on the concept of authenticity as the sense of congruence between action and belief, and the way that teachers construct their approach according to a philosophy of practice. I posit that authenticity can either work as a gap or a bridge between positive student-teacher motivation. In other words, when students and teachers both share an appreciation of the value of classroom activity, the learning is authentic. This presentation reflects on these complex issues and begins exploring them in context. This paper attempts to be as practical as possible by sharing lived professional experiences from the classroom. Samples of students’ work will be shown that indicate their level of engagement in class, with a discussion of strategies employed to help them maintain motivation, such as reflection and tasks involving metacognitive strategies.
