User requirements for students and tutors
1. Introduction
The interface of the Chaucer edition prototype was driven by the requirements of a Chaucer studies teaching and learning community, made up of students and tutors at UK and US higher education institutions. The UK and US were selected because Chaucer studies as a course or module of study is much less available now than in the early 2000s. For instance, Edwards (2021) surveyed a number of institutions in the UK and found Chaucer was “disappearing from the university curriculum” in favour of efforts to decolonise courses, their required reading and independent study.
Evans (2022) recognises the multiple voices and identities that have been erased from medieval literature, yet advocates for Chaucer’s inclusion on the curriculum. His literature can expand and shift conversation towards a diverse range of communities outside the white, patriarchal sphere. Evans demonstrates that Chaucer’s inclusion on the curriculum can be reparative, as shown by projects such as Refugee Tales, Matthew X. Vernon’s Black Middle Ages and Jonathan Hsy’s Antiracist Medievalisms, all of which discuss issues of anti-racism and feminism in Chaucer studies beyond the institution, locating the field within a wider arts and cultural industry. Despite Chaucer’s work coming under significant scrutiny in the US and beyond, its place on the curriculum is necessary to be able to critique the construction of Anglo-/Euro-centric and unrepresentative literary canons. The aim of our user requirements studies was to therefore gain an understanding of the interest in Chaucer – with the UK and US as starting points – recognising what currently works or can be improved within Chaucer studies, to increase engagement with the aforementioned topics.
Under the guidance of Michael Pidd and Bridgette Wessels, Sophie Whittle facilitated focus groups and interviews at various UK and US institutions between April and September 2023, to investigate new, state-of-the art methods for producing advanced digital tools that would engage students in, and increase access to, Chaucer’s literature. The secondary aim was to also understand critical and digital literacies amongst students, particularly in an age of increasing AI usage, including students’ thoughts about these digital ‘tools’ in higher education. This element of the user studies was not to promote or encourage the use of AI, but to recognise any possible benefits, limitations and implications on education and for learning about medieval texts.
The focus groups and interviews are in the process of being transcribed and will be available on the DHI Data Service in the coming year. In this chapter, we discuss elements of the user studies and their findings, to highlight the basis on which the development team built the Chaucer edition prototype. We have separated student and lecturer insights based on different themes, involving contemporary topics in Chaucer studies, digital resources, generative AI, book history, translation, and more. Feel free to select topics of interest using the hyperlinks we have included throughout.
2. Main methods: Focus groups and interviews
The focus group was selected as a method to gather insights from students, as it provides space for participants to discuss their experience and form ideas organically based on general topics/prompts, while the facilitator observes interactions between students (e.g. see Bryman 2012: 501). The role of the facilitator was minimal—they intervened only when topic discussion came to a natural end, at which point the facilitator would ask follow-up questions and allow for further conversation to flow between students. The facilitator would also ensure the voices of all participants were heard, by gently asking specific people if they would like to contribute, particularly if the same participants were regularly voicing their views.
Methods of reciprocal peer interviewing were used with lecturers to reduce power differentials between interviewer and interviewee often evident in structured interviews (Bryman 2012: 491). It was necessary for the interviewer to foster peer-like, collegial relationships with teachers, since the aim of these preliminary discussions was to empower learning and teaching communities to form integral leadership roles and make decisions regarding digital pedagogies. Porter et al. (2009: 306) discuss the reciprocal peer interviewing process as a feminist approach to addressing power imbalance, with participants co-constructing the interview. The facilitator in peer interviews allowed conversation to flow based on the directions of the lecturer. Other than the occasional steering of the conversation by the interviewer based on the topics discussed by the interviewee, contributors had the space to discuss their experience to-date and ask for opinions from the interviewer. The method matched, as closely as possible, natural conversation between colleagues, mirroring the dynamic discussion between facilitator and student in focus group discussions.
Students and lecturers were provided with prompts in relation to their learning and teaching experiences within Chaucer and medieval studies. These prompts were particularly focused on understanding the digital pedagogies and tools adopted in the current climate of HE and Chaucer studies. Within focus groups, examples of prompts include:
- The relevance of Chaucer today (whether linguistic, literary, sociocultural, etc.), including the themes they were interested in, their thoughts about medieval life and modern-day adaptations of Chaucer, and what the works mean to them personally.
- The (digital) resources students would like to see or think are useful within the study of Chaucer, including the methods of learning students currently favour within Chaucer studies.
- Relatedly, students’ attitude to the use of modern technology such as AI in learning Chaucer, including a comparison between different types of digital scholarly and teaching resources (e.g. digital scholarly editions), and the usefulness of these tools used in class.
For teachers, the overall structure of the interview followed similar prompts to those of the student sessions, including: an understanding of the lecturers’ teaching background and style; why it is necessary to study Chaucer today and the benefits and challenges; the (digital) resources they use to teach; and features of digital resources teachers would like to see within the classroom. One of the most useful prompts in both types of discussion was their critique of current technology as pedagogical tools, with their answers directly feeding into how a tool might emerge alongside the growing use of generative AI.
Following focus groups and interviews conducted in the learning community, we underwent an initial developer process to test the suitability of methods of AI for students’ learning of Chaucer. This process involved analysis of student, teacher and facilitator conversations by editors and developers with expertise in the medieval period and the textual/oral edition, to establish a prototype digital scholarly edition that engages students in the independent and collaborative study of Chaucer. We hope this process will lead to further testing and iterations of the edition in similar learning communities.
The different levels and types of expertise thus came together to form an initial space for collaboration and co-creation, with insights from students, lecturers, researchers and developers directly informing how best to enhance resources in Chaucer studies, and project staff members facilitating the future development of digital tools.
3. Academic background of students and teachers
Table 1 presents details about each of the participants. For students, the details include their degree course and year of study, and for teachers, their job title is included (which is non-specific to preserve anonymity). No names or institutional affiliations are provided as per our ethics review, and instead, each participant has been assigned an ID number. In the below reports, students are referred to with ‘S’ and their corresponding ID number (e.g. S1), and teachers with ‘T’ plus their ID (e.g. T1).
Go to Table 1
This study received ethics approval from the University of Sheffield Research Ethics Committee, as administered by the Digital Humanities Institute (DHI). All students and teachers in our study received information sheets about their participation. They all provided their informed consent to contribute to the project and have their responses published by the DHI Data Service and in future research articles.
4. Student perspectives of Chaucer studies
First, we delve into some of the perspectives provided by students. Focus groups were conducted either on a university campus, or online (in the case of the US institution). The following sections discuss: the themes that attracted students to study Chaucer at university (or pre-university) and the most salient topics they discovered while studying; the (digital) resources and tools that already work in the learning community, and their ideas for new digital editions; the importance of translation from Middle to Modern English for accessibility and engaging as wide a community as possible in Chaucer studies; understanding the textual tradition and engaging with early manuscripts; and the overall benefits and challenges of studying Chaucer.
4.1. Themes students find interesting and/or important
Gender, sexuality, religion, multilingualism, and the global context were all features that students identified as interesting or crucial to the study of Chaucer. In particular, students wanted to connect to Chaucer’s works in a way that allows them to appreciate the uncanniness of the period, as well as the things that make characters human. We provide some snippets from the focus groups below, and you can access the full ‘Themes’ page here.
1. The differences between the medieval and modern period
2. Representations of gender, and roles in medieval society
3. Medieval religion and culture
4. Multilingualism and the global context
5. Literary forms and author biographies
4.2. Translation for understanding medieval narratives
The students raised the issue of the barriers to understanding and translating the Middle English language, particularly, the differences in grammar and meaning between the medieval period and the present day, the teaching of translation and the hidden processes of decision-making, and their opinions on the methods that work best when tackling translations independently and for assignments. You can access the full Translation page here.
1. Challenges of reading and translation Middle English
2. Useful methods for reading and translating
3. Importance of translation
4.3. Manuscripts and digitisation
The students also discussed the importance of visualising the textual transmission process, from manuscript to print. They discussed their visits to Special Collections in their respective university libraries, how helpful these sessions were for understanding medieval text, and how the original text should be displayed in the university classroom or within digital resources. You can view the full Manuscripts page here.
1. Special Collections visits
2. Codicology and interesting features
3. Flexibility of The Canterbury Tales
4. Digitisation
4.4. (Digital) resources and ideas in the classroom, including thoughts about AI
You can view the full Digital Resources page here.
1. Benefits and improvements to (digital) resources
2. Ideas for digital resources and tools
3. Thoughts on AI
5. Teacher perspectives of Chaucer studies
Along with students’ thoughts about Chaucer in the university classroom, lecturers also provided their insight. Students and tutors were interviewed separately so students could provide an honest account of studying Chaucer. We found that teachers’ and students’ opinion of Chaucer studies were generally complementary, as they recognised the main challenges to studying Chaucer, and provided similar improvements to access and increasing engagement through digital means. While students may be guided towards particular topics as presented to them in the classroom, the tutors mentioned the ways in which they encourage independent research and use of (digital) tools and resources to help them find scholarly sources and avenues to pursue.
5.1. Themes developed in the classroom
The themes presented below are developed in the classroom by teachers, and they are visible within students’ interests. From speaking with students, they felt empowered to research and discover their own avenues of exploration as a result of their teachers’ encouragement. You can access the full ‘Themes’ page here (see e.g. T1 for teacher insights).
1. The differences between the medieval and modern period
2. Representations of gender, and roles in medieval society
3. Medieval religion and culture
4. Multilingualism and the global context
5. Marginalised identities in Chaucer and beyond
5.2. Translation and understanding medieval narratives
In this section, teachers discuss: how they introduce translation into the classroom and assignments; crowdsourced translations with expertise from professional, academic and student writers; and the challenges of translating for the purpose of understanding medieval narratives. You can access the full Translation page here (see e.g. T1 for teacher insights).
1. Translation assignments
2. Challenges of reading and translating Middle English
5.3. Manuscripts and digitisation
Here, teachers reflect on what is required from sessions on Chaucer, in terms of viewing original manuscripts, learning about the textual tradition, and engaging with features of manuscripts and print editions. You can view the full Manuscripts page here (see e.g. T1 for teacher insights).
1. Special Collections visits
2. Codicology and interesting features
3. Flexibility of The Canterbury Tales
4. Digitisation
5.4. (Digital) resources and ideas in the classroom
Lastly, teachers reflect on their preferences for digital and critical resources in the classroom and for independent study, the resources preferred by students (including some of the challenges of using various digital and critical apparatus), and how interactional and static elements can be built into digital resources. You can view the full Digital Resources page here (see e.g. T1 for teacher insights).
1. Benefits and improvements to (digital) resources
2. Ideas for digital resources and tools
3. Student involvement in the editing process
6. Overview of developer response
The editorial and development team on C21 Editions, formed of editors, researchers and developers in Chaucer and Middle English, considered all insights from students and teachers, which informed the following main features for a digital teaching edition of The Pardoner’s Prologue and Tale:
- The ‘original text’ (i.e. a diplomatic transcription from the Ellesmere manuscript; a popular witness with features of interest for students), alongside a translation.
- High resolution digitised manuscript images, with ‘zoom’ features and links to the text.
- Annotation, which can be toggled on and off, with contextual and etymological information, as well as information on how the word has changed over time.
- Topic guides which are linked up to the text in the form of topic summaries, with essays that root the tale in recent secondary scholarship and thought, and links to further information. This includes scholarship on gender, sexuality, race, multilingualism and Chaucer within a global context.
- Contextual background guides on the tale, the frame narrative, the historical context and the author.
- Activities for students to hone their skills in Middle English, gain a deeper understanding of Chaucer and his works, and the historical process of textual transmission, from manuscript to print.
There are also opportunities for feedback within the edition itself. To maintain an authoritative, yet collaborative editorial environment, the edition builds in online discussion boards. The aim for this style of teaching is to foster peer discussion while empowering students to suggest improvements, including their thoughts on aspects of translation, pronunciation and manuscript analysis.
A further aim of the project was the testing of state-of-the-art technology for producing digital teaching editions, and whether such models and their outputs are suitable for students and their teachers, which is closely linked to their insights about digital tools within Chaucer studies. The Translating, Listening and Speaking, Meaning and Value pages discuss our findings and assess whether these digital methods and their outcomes meet the requirements posed by the learning community. In particular, the Value chapter shows what we can gain from students’ critical engagement with AI, in relation to teaching medieval texts, history and culture.
7. References
- Bryman, Alan. 2012. Social Research Methods, 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Edwards, A. S. G. 2021. “Gladly wolde he lerne? Why Chaucer is disappearing from the university curriculum.” TLS. Times Literary Supplement 6170: 7–9. https://www.the-tls.co.uk/literature-by-region/british-literature/why-is-chaucer-disappearing-from-the-university-curriculum-leicester-essay-a-s-g-edwards/.
- Evans, Ruth. 2022. “On Not Being Chaucer.” Studies in the Age of Chaucer 44 (1): 2–26. https://doi.org/10.1353/sac.2022.0028.
- Porter, Elaine, Sheila M. Neysmith, Marge Reitsma-Street & Stephanie Baker Collins. 2009. “Reciprocal Peer Interviewing.” International Review of Qualitative Research 2 (2): 291–312. https://doi.org/10.1525/irqr.2009.2.2.291.
8. Data
8.1. Data: Copy of prompt sheets
Below we have provided copies of prompt sheets for participation in the student focus groups and teacher interviews.