Keywords
Higher education
NotebookLM
Human-AI collaboration
How to Cite
Abstract
Objective: This study examines how the linguistic choices made by a human curriculum designer and Google’s NotebookLM constructed their roles and relationship during their collaborative curriculum design, and what these patterns revealed about the distribution and mobilization of human and technological resources.
Methods: This work adopts an autoethnographic design and analyzes a two-month written interaction between an experienced curriculum designer and NotebookLM during the redesign of an undergraduate education class in the UK. The corpus comprised 367 interactional turns and 50,832 words. The interaction was analyzed discursively through Systemic Functional Linguistics and Appraisal Theory. Brown’s (2011) Design Capacity for Enactment framework was subsequently employed to interpret the 48 curriculum-design episodes identified in the corpus.
Results: The interaction was collaborative and increasingly personalized, but asymmetrical in design authority. NotebookLM contributed extensive textual production, elaboration, source synthesis, and strongly affirmative language, while the Human Designer expressed pedagogical intentions, evaluated proposals, controlled sequencing, and determined what should be accepted, modified, or rejected. The design episodes showed that adaptation was the most common form of resource appropriation, while instances of rejection provided additional evidence of human design authority.
Discussion: The findings suggest that Generative AI can become a substantive curriculum-design resource without displacing educators’ role as designers. NotebookLM expanded the range of candidate curricular representations, but their relevance depended on human evaluation, contextualization, and transformation. Linguistic alignment and extensive AI production did not necessarily correspond with design authority or successful implementation, reinforcing the need for continued professional judgment in Generative AI-supported curriculum design.
References
Adams, T. E., Ellis, C., & Jones, S. H. (2017). Autoethnography. In J. Matthes, C. S. Davis, & R. F. Potter (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of communication research methods. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0011
Ahmad, A., & Schmid, T. (2025). Synergising human expertise and generative artificial intelligence for curriculum design. In V. Köppen & S. Strickroth (Eds.), Fachtagung Bildungstechnologien (DELFI 2025) (pp. 239-244). https://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/47095
Atay, A. (2020). What is cyber or digital autoethnography? International Review of Qualitative Research, 13(3), 267-279. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940844720934373
Beguš, G., Dabkowski, M., & Rhodes, R. (2025). Large linguistic models: Investigating LLMs’ metalinguistic abilities. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 6(12), 3453-3467. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=11022724
Belkina, M., Daniel, S., Nikolic, S., Haque, R., Lyden, S., Neal, P., Grundy, S., &Hassan, G. M. (2025). Implementing generative AI (GenAI) in higher education: A systematic review of case studies. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, Article 100407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100407
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Brown, M. W. (2011). The teacher–tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In B.A. Herbel-Eisenmann, G. M. Lloyd, & J. T. Remillard (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work (pp. 37-56). Routledge.
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: Perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2024). On cyber-social learning: A critique of artificial intelligence in education. In D. Kourkoulou, A. O. Tzirides, B. Cope, & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Trust and inclusion in AI-mediated education: Where human learning meets learning machines (pp. 3–34). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-64487-0_1
Donnellan, M. (2025). Evaluating the linguistic range of ChatGPT: A corpus analysis. International Conference on Globalisation in Languages, Education, Culture, and Communication (GLECC2025). https://glecc.org/submission/index.php/portal/article/download/112/28
Eggins, S. (1994). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. Pinter Publishers.
Ellis, C., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2011). Autoethnography: An overview. Historical Social Research, 36(4), 273-290. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23032294
Francis, N. J, Jones, S., & Smith, D. P. (2025). Generative AI in higher education: Balancing innovation and integrity. British Journal of Biomedical Science, 81, Article 14048. https://doi.org/10.3389/bjbs.2024.14048
Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Deakin University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014). An introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). Arnold.
Kalantzis, M., Cope, B., Chan, E., & Dalley-Trim, L. (2016). Literacies (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Kalantzis, M., Cope, B., & Zapata, G. C. (in press). Learning by Design (2nd ed.). Common Ground Publishing.
Lee, D., Arnold, M., Srivastava, A., Plastow, K., Strelan, P., Ploeckl, F., Lekkas, D., & Palmer, E. (2024). The impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: A study of educators’ perspectives. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, Article 100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221
Mao, J., Romero-Hall, E., & Reeves, T.C. (2024). Autoethnography as a research method for educational technology: A reflective discourse. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72, 2725–2741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10281-6
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse. Meaning beyond the clause (2nd ed.). Continuum.
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Priestley, M., Biesta, G. J. J., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: what is it and why does it matter? In R. Kneyber & J. Evers (Eds.), Flip the system: Changing education from the bottom up. Routledge. https://www.storre.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/21559/1/Teacher%20agency%20matters_Flip%20the%20system_final.pdf
Rambo, C., & Ellis, C. (2020). Autoethnography. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeosa082.pub2
Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002211
Reyna, J. (2025, October 13-16). The potential of Google NotebookLM for teaching and learning. eLearn 2025, Bangkok, Thailand. https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/393965130_The_Potential_of_Google_NotebookLM_for_Teaching_and_Learning
Roine, H.-R., Refsum, A. S., & Walker Rettberg, J. (2026). ‘YES! YES! I absolutely love this insight!’: Affirmative narration as interactional strategy in dialogues with LLM chatbots. Narrative Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.25155.roi
Rutecka, P., Cicha, K., Rizun, M., & Strzelecki, A. (2025). Generative AI in curriculum design: Empirical insights into model performance and educational constraints. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 18, 757-768. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/11072910
Sharma, M., Tong, M., Korbak, T., Duvenaud, D., Askell, A., Bowman, S. R., Cheng, N., Durmus, E., Hatfield-Dodds, Z., & Johnston, S. R. (2025). Towards understanding sycophancy in language models. ArXiv Preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.13548
Tzirides, A. O., Zapata, G. C., Kastania, N. P., Saini, A. K., Castro, V., Abdul Rahman Ismael, S., You, Y., Afonso dos Santos, T., Searsmith, D., O’Brien, C., Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2024). Combining human and artificial intelligence for enhanced AI literacy in higher education. Computers and Education Open, 6, Article 100184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2024.100184
Tufino, E. (2025). NotebookLM: An LLM with RAG for active learning and collaborative tutoring. ArXiv Preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.09720
Ullmann, T. D., Edwards, C., Bektik, D., Herodotou, C., & Whitelock, D. (2024). Towards Generative AI for course content production: Expert reflections. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 26(S1), 20-34. https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2024-0013
UNESCO. (2025). AI and the future of education: Disruptions, dilemmas, and directions. https://doi.org/10.54675/KECK1261
VERBI Software. (2021). MAXQDA 2022. Computer software. https://www.maxqda.com/
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design (1st ed.). Merrill Prentice Hall.
Zapata, G. C. (2018). The role of digital, Learning by Design instructional materials in the development of Spanish heritage learners’ literacy skills. In G. C. Zapata & M. Lacorte (Eds.), Multiliteracies pedagogy and language learning: Teaching Spanish to heritage speakers (pp. 67–106). Palgrave Macmillan.
Zapata, G. C. (2023). Self-discovery and healing in Nepantla: Multimodality and Learning by Design in a mixed Spanish university classroom. The International Journal of Pedagogy and Curriculum, 30(1), 17-35. https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-7963/CGP/v30i01/17-35
Zapata, G. C., Saini, A., Tzirides, A. O, Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2024). The role of AI feedback in university students’ learning experiences: An exploration grounded in Activity Theory. Ubiquitous Learning: An International Journal, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.18848/1835-9795/CGP/v18i02/1-30
Zapata, G. C., Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., Tzirides, A. O., Saini, A. K., Searsmith, D., Whiting, J., Kastania, N. P., Castro, V., Kourkoulou, T., Jones, J. W., & Abrantes da Silva, R. (2025a). AI and peer reviews in higher education: Students’ multimodal views on benefits, differences and limitations. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 34(5), 583-601. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2025.2480807
Zapata, G. C., Tzirides A. O., Cope, B., You, Y.-L., Kalantzis, M., & Searsmith, D. (2025b). A systemic functional linguistics discourse analysis of learner-centered, generative AI feedback in higher education. EdArXiv Preprints. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/nuhq2_v1
Zapata, G. C., Cope, B., Kalantzis, M., & Searsmith, D. (2025c). Calibrated generative AI as meta-reviewer: A systemic functional linguistics discourse analysis of reviews of peer reviews. ArXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2509.15035
Zapata, G. C., Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2026). Literacies in the age of AI: Teaching and learning in the digital era. Wiley.