Objective:

Students will compare human and computer interpretations of figurative language, word relationships, and nuances in meaning. They will use flowcharts to illustrate the differences and recognize the limitations of current language-processing technologies.

Materials Needed:

• Word lists featuring figurative expressions (literary, biblical, and mythological allusions)

• Large paper and markers

• Printed examples of technology-based interpretations (e.g., from search engines or translation apps)

Steps:

• Introduction: 

  • Discuss figurative language and how humans interpret metaphors, idioms, and allusions. 

  • Explain that computers often struggle with these interpretations due to a lack of cultural or contextual understanding.

• Group Activity: 

  • In small groups, students will identify and analyze several examples of figurative language. 

  • They will create flowcharts to show how humans decode these phrases and compare this to how a computer might misinterpret the language.

• Technology Discussion: 

  • Lead a discussion on how search engines, translation apps, and chatbots often misinterpret figurative language. 

  • Provide examples and discuss why human oversight is critical to ensure accuracy in tech-based language tools.

• Presentation and Reflection: 

  • Each group presents their flowcharts and discusses the differences they identified between human and computer interpretations of language. 

  • Emphasize how human interpretation adds critical cultural and contextual understanding that technology lacks.

Equity and Access:

Offer sentence starters or pre-made flowcharts to support students who need additional help understanding figurative language.

Real-World Application:

Connect this activity to real-world language-processing tools like Google Translate or Siri, discussing how these tools can misinterpret idiomatic expressions, often leading to inaccurate or confusing translations.

CS Practice(s):

• Recognizing and Defining Computational Problems: Students analyze the limitations of computing technologies in interpreting language nuances.

• Communicating about Computing: Students reflect on how human language interpretation is crucial to fixing these issues in current technology.

Standard(s):

• CA CCSS ELA-Literacy L.7.5

• CA CS 6-8.IC.20

Objective:

Students will use multimedia to represent figurative language and analyze how technology may misinterpret these nuances. They will develop multimedia projects to explore the tradeoffs and limitations of technology in understanding language.

Materials Needed:

• Computers with access to Google Slides or PowerPoint

• Word lists with figurative language and word pairs

• Access to royalty-free images and videos

• Examples of technology-based language misinterpretations (e.g., Google Translate, chatbots)

Steps:

• Introduction: 

  • Begin by discussing the role of multimedia in enhancing communication and how digital tools often misinterpret figurative language and word connotations. 

  • Provide examples of technological misinterpretations (e.g., Google Translate mistakes).

• Group Activity: 

  • In pairs, students choose word pairs or figurative phrases and create multimedia slides representing the words' connotations. 

  • They will create one slide for how a human interprets the phrase and another for how a computer might misinterpret it, using multimedia to enhance the meaning.

• Discussion on Technology Tradeoffs: 

  • Lead a discussion on the limitations of digital tools in interpreting figurative language and the importance of human oversight to prevent misunderstandings. 

  • Students will explore the tradeoffs between automation and human involvement.

• Presentation and Reflection: 

  • Students present their multimedia slides and discuss how they chose to represent the human interpretation versus the technological one. 

  • Reflect on how human involvement is essential to improving language-processing tools.

Equity and Access:

Provide pre-designed templates or a list of multimedia resources for students who need additional support in creating their slides.

Real-World Application:

Discuss the role of language-processing tools like speech-to-text software, online translators, and virtual assistants. Highlight real-world examples of where these tools have failed to interpret language correctly, and discuss how human intervention helps improve these technologies.

CS Practice(s):

• Creating Computational Artifacts: Students use multimedia tools to create representations of figurative language interpretations.

• Testing and Refining Computational Artifacts: Students analyze and critique how well digital tools interpret figurative language, identifying areas for improvement.

Standard(s):

• CA CCSS ELA-Literacy L.7.5

• CA CS 6-8.IC.20