IS ONLINE LEARNING MORE EFFECTIVE THAN OFFLINE LEARNING?

Author: Jumanazarova Nafisa

Email:davlatmuradovna@gmail.com

ORCID:0009-0001-5442-4349

University:National university of Uzbekistan

Field: Foreign language and literature

Annotation: This study examines the effectiveness of online and traditional education. The relevance of this topic is due to the rapid development of technology and the widespread adoption of distance learning in recent years. The main objective of the research is to identify the advantages and disadvantages of both online and offline education and to evaluate their impact on the learning process. The study employs comparative, analytical, and generalization methods. Both forms of education are explored, and their distinctive features are highlighted. The findings indicate that online education provides convenience and flexibility, whereas offline education enhances direct interaction and supervision.In conclusion, both forms of education are important, and their combined application can lead to more effective outcomes.

Keywords: Online education, traditional education, distance learning, educational effectiveness, learning process, educational technologies, interactive learning, flexibility, quality of education, digital education.

Annotatsiya: Ushbu ishda onlayn va an’anaviy  ta’limning samaradorligi tahlil qilinadi. Mazkur mavzu hozirgi kunda texnologiyalarning tez rivojlanishi va masofaviy ta’limning keng tarqalishi sababli dolzarb hisoblanadi. Tadqiqotning asosiy maqsadi — onlayn va offline ta’limning afzallik va kamchiliklarini aniqlash hamda ularning o‘quv jarayoniga ta’sirini baholashdan iborat. Ish davomida taqqoslash, tahlil va umumlashtirish metodlaridan foydalanilgan. Tadqiqotda har ikkala ta’lim turi o‘rganilib, ularning o‘ziga xos jihatlari yoritib berilgan. Natijalar shuni ko‘rsatadiki, onlayn ta’lim qulaylik va moslashuvchanlikni ta’minlasa, offline ta’lim bevosita muloqot va nazoratni kuchaytiradi. Xulosa qilib aytganda, har ikkala ta’lim turi ham muhim bo‘lib, ularni uyg‘unlashtirib qo‘llash samarali natija berishi mumkin.

Kalit so’zlar: Onlayn ta’lim, an’anaviy ta’lim, masofaviy o‘qitish, ta’lim samaradorligi, o‘quv jarayoni, ta’lim texnologiyalari, interaktiv o‘qitish, moslashuvchanlik, ta’lim sifati, raqamli ta’lim.

Аннотация: В данном исследовании рассматривается эффективность онлайн- и традиционного  образования. Актуальность темы обусловлена быстрым развитием технологий и широким распространением дистанционного обучения в последние годы. Основная цель исследования — выявить преимущества и недостатки онлайн- и офлайн-образования, а также оценить их влияние на учебный процесс.В ходе исследования использовались методы сравнения, анализа и обобщения. Были изучены обе формы обучения и раскрыты их отличительные особенности. Результаты показывают, что онлайн-образование обеспечивает удобство и гибкость, тогда как офлайн-образование усиливает непосредственное взаимодействие и контроль.В заключение следует отметить, что обе формы обучения являются важными, и их сочетание может привести к более эффективным результатам.

Ключевые слова: Онлайн-образование, традиционное образование, дистанционное обучение, эффективность образования, учебный процесс, образовательные технологии, интерактивное обучение, гибкость, качество образования, цифровое образование.

 INTRODUCTION 

In recent years, the education system has undergone significant transformations under the influence of rapidly developing technologies. In particular, the widespread adoption of online education has created the need to compare it with the traditional (offline) education system. This article is specifically devoted to analyzing the effectiveness of online and offline education, aiming to determine their role and significance in the learning process.

The relevance of this topic lies in the fact that today many pupils and students are faced with the necessity of choosing between two modes of learning—distance and traditional. The development of digital technologies, the expansion of internet accessibility, and the increased popularity of distance education in the post-pandemic period have made this issue even more important. Therefore, identifying which type of education is more effective has become a crucial matter not only for learners but also for teachers and the education system as a whole.

At the same time, although existing studies have separately highlighted the advantages of online and offline education, there remains a certain gap in directly comparing their actual effectiveness and drawing clear conclusions. In some cases, the convenience of online education is highly valued, while in others, the effectiveness of traditional education is considered superior. This indicates the need for a more in-depth investigation of the issue.

The main objective of this article is to analyze the effectiveness of online and offline education, identify their strengths and weaknesses, and justify in which situations each type of education is more effective. Furthermore, the study examines the impact of both forms of education on students’ learning processes and, based on this analysis, provides general conclusions.  

 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study aims to determine the effectiveness of online and traditional (offline) education and employs a mixed-methods approach. This approach allows for a comprehensive examination of the research problem from multiple perspectives. During the study, the impact of different modes of education on learning outcomes was analyzed using both qualitative and quantitative data.

The research design is based on comparative and survey methods. Through this approach, the differences between online and offline education, as well as their effectiveness, were systematically compared.

The main research problem is to determine how effective online education is in comparison to offline education. Based on this, the following research questions were formulated: How does online education affect learning outcomes? What is the level of achievement in offline education? Which type of education do students prefer? In addition, the study proposes the following hypothesis: there is no significant difference between the effectiveness of online and offline education.

The participants of the study were students enrolled in higher education institutions. The sample was formed using a random sampling method.

Data collection methods included surveys, observation, and statistical data analysis. Surveys were used to examine students’ opinions, observation helped to analyze learning activities, and statistical data were applied to evaluate academic performance.

To ensure the reliability of the research results, the survey questions were pre-tested, multiple sources were cross-checked, and the findings were statistically verified. This contributed to enhancing the validity and reliability of the study.   

 LITERATURE REVIEW 

In the last 5–10 years, due to the rapid development of digital technologies in the education system, a significant number of scientific studies have been conducted comparing online and traditional  education. In particular, the widespread use of distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic further increased academic interest in this topic. In general academic literature, online education is characterized by its flexibility and independence from time and place. In contrast, offline education is valued for its advantages in direct communication, teacher supervision, and the formation of a social learning environment.

Among recent studies, the work of Means (2013) indicates that online education in some cases produces equal or even higher outcomes compared to traditional education. According to their analysis, well-designed online courses with interactive materials can significantly improve students’ academic performance.

Similarly, Broadbent and Poon (2015) found that self-regulated learning skills are a crucial factor for success in online education. In other words, the effectiveness of online learning largely depends on the learner’s level of independence and ability to manage their own study process.

From another perspective, Bernard et al. (2014), based on a meta-analysis, argue that there is not always a significant difference between the outcomes of online and offline education. They emphasize that educational effectiveness depends more on teaching methodology, instructional quality, and course organization, while the mode of delivery is considered a secondary factor.

Post-COVID-19 studies, particularly the work of Adedoyin and Soykan (2020), highlight that online education ensured the continuity of the learning process; however, challenges such as reduced student motivation, technical difficulties, and limited social interaction were observed. In contrast, offline education is distinguished by a more stable learning environment and higher student engagement through face-to-face interaction.

Local studies conducted in the context of Uzbekistan also examine the implementation and effectiveness of online education. The results of these studies indicate that although online learning has expanded access to education, many students still prefer traditional education. This preference is mainly attributed to direct interaction with teachers, a disciplined learning environment, and easier comprehension of materials.

At the same time, some researchers argue that excessive reliance on offline education may limit the development of modern digital skills. Therefore, in recent academic literature, blended learning is increasingly considered the most optimal approach, as it combines the advantages of both online and offline education.

Overall, the literature review shows that there is no definitive conclusion regarding the effectiveness of online versus offline education. Both forms have their strengths and weaknesses, and their effectiveness largely depends on teaching quality, student engagement, and contextual factors.

 RESEARCH RESULTS 

In the present study, the activities of students enrolled in both online and offline education systems were analyzed. The collected data showed that students in the online learning group demonstrated higher performance in independent learning and time management skills. However, in the offline learning group, the level of classroom engagement and direct interaction with instructors was significantly higher.

According to statistical analysis, no substantial difference was found in the overall academic performance (test scores) between the two groups. The average results were nearly identical, with a difference of approximately 5–8%. This indicates that not the mode of education itself, but rather teaching quality and individual student characteristics play a more significant role.

The survey results revealed that the majority of respondents considered online education to be convenient and flexible, with 74% of students identifying time and location independence as its main advantage. At the same time, 69% of respondents stated that direct interaction with instructors in offline education helps them better understand learning materials.

Observations also showed that students in online education rely more on independent learning, whereas offline education is characterized by higher classroom participation and more dynamic question-and-answer interactions.

 DISCUSSION 

The obtained results indicate that both online and offline education have their own advantages and limitations. Online education provides students with flexibility, opportunities for independent learning, and access to a wide range of resources. These findings are consistent with previous studies, confirming that the effectiveness of online education largely depends on the learner’s self-regulation abilities.

Offline education, on the other hand, supports deeper understanding of knowledge through face-to-face communication, teacher supervision, and a structured social environment. The results of this study show that many students perceive offline education as more understandable and effective due to the possibility of receiving immediate feedback and answers to their questions.

Based on statistical findings, it can be concluded that there is no significant difference in overall academic performance between online and offline education. This suggests that teaching methodology and student motivation play a more crucial role than the mode of education itself.

Furthermore, some challenges were identified during the study. In online education, reduced concentration and motivation were observed, while in offline education, time and location constraints created difficulties for some students.

Overall, the results of this study suggest that the most effective approach is a blended learning model that combines the advantages of both online and offline education. This approach contributes to improving educational quality and meeting diverse student needs.

 CONCLUSION 

The main objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of online and traditional  education and to determine their impact on the learning process. The results of the research showed that both forms of education have their own specific advantages: online education primarily enhances independent learning and flexibility, while offline education contributes to deeper knowledge acquisition through face-to-face communication, active classroom participation, and teacher supervision.

Based on the findings, there is no significant difference in overall academic performance between online and offline education. However, their impact is manifested in different skill areas. This indicates that educational effectiveness depends not only on the mode of delivery but also on teaching methodology, student motivation, and individual learning characteristics.

The results of this study have important practical implications for improving the organization of the educational process. They suggest that educators should consider the strengths of both learning formats when designing instruction. In particular, combining digital resources from online education with interactive communication from offline education may enhance overall learning outcomes.

Accordingly, the blended learning model is recommended as the most appropriate approach in the education system. This model integrates the advantages of both online and offline education and helps create an effective learning environment tailored to students’ needs.

Future research should explore this topic on a broader scale, including different age groups and educational institutions, as well as analyze the long-term impact of digital technologies on the quality of education.

 REFERENCES

1. Means B., Toyama Y., Murphy R., Bakia M., Jones K. Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies. — Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, 2010.
2. Bernard R. M., Borokhovski E., Schmid R. F., Tamim R. M., Abrami P. C. A meta-analysis of blended learning and technology use in postsecondary education. — Review of Educational Research, 2014. — Vol. 84(1). — P. 1–35.
3. Broadbent J., Poon W. L. Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments. — Internet and Higher Education, 2015. — Vol. 27. — P. 1–13.
4. Adedoyin O. B., Soykan E. COVID-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. — Interactive Learning Environments, 2020. — P. 1–13.
5. Moore M. G., Kearsley G. Distance Education: A Systems View of Online Learning. — Boston: Cengage Learning, 2012.
6. Hrastinski S. What do we mean by blended learning? — TechTrends, 2019. — Vol. 63(5). — P. 564–569.
7. UNESCO. Education in a post-COVID world: Nine ideas for public action. — Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 2021.
8. OECD. Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators. — Paris: OECD Publishing, 2023.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH AND UZBEK TERMINOLOGICAL SYSTEMS: A CROSS‑LINGUISTIC AND CROSS‑DOMAIN STUDY

Alimardonova Gulsevar Sirojiddinovna

Denau Institute of Entrepreneurship and Pedagogy, Student

Email address: alimardonovagulsevar10@gmail.com

Phone number: +998885064007

Annotation. This article investigates a comprehensive comparative analysis of the terminological systems of English and Uzbek, two languages occupying distinct positions in the global linguistic landscape. English, as a well‑established language of science and international connection, possesses a mature, largely standardized, and globally influential terminology. Uzbek, a Turkic language facing active modernization and lexical development post‑independence, represents a dynamic case of terminology formation, balancing native resources with historical borrowings and modern international influences. Employing a qualitative contrastive methodology based on illustrative terminology theory, this article analyzes term‑formation processes, semantic structures, and standardization mechanisms across selected disciplines, including information technology, law, tourism, ecology, and business. The analysis reveals that while English terminology leverages Graeco‑Latin roots and compounding within an analytic‑synthetic system, Uzbek predominantly deploys its agglutinative morphology for derivation, alongside strategic calquing and selective borrowing.

Keywords: Terminology, contrastive analysis, English, Uzbek, term‑Formation, standardization, language planning, lexicography.

Terminology, the specialized vocabulary denoting concepts within specific subject fields, functions as the cornerstone of precise knowledge depiction and effectual professional communication. In an increasingly interconnected world, the analysis of how different languages enhance and systematize their terminological resources is not merely an academic exercise but a practical necessity for education, translation, technology transfer, and international cooperation. This article assumes a systematic comparison of the terminological systems of English and Uzbek, a pairing that offers a compelling lens through which to present the interplay between a global lingua franca and a national language in a phase of active lexical modernization.

English terminology, with its profound historical roots in Graeco‑Latin scholarship and its contemporary role as the primary language of science, technology, and global business, demonstrates a highly codified and diffused system. Its development has been relatively organic over centuries, bolstered by the output of major Anglophone research institutions and the actual standardizing role of international organizations and publications. Contrary, the Uzbek terminological system is characterized by a dynamic and deliberate process of progress. The modern literary Uzbek language, based primarily on the Karluk (Chagatai) dialect group, has experienced crucial lexical transformation throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. Its terminology shows layers of influence: a Turkic base, a stratum of Arabic and Persian borrowings associated with classical learning and Islam, a substantial influx of Russian terminology during the Soviet period, and a modern wave of borrowings and calques from English, particularly in developing domains.

Literature Review

The English Terminological System

The advancement of English terminology is well‑documented. Its power and flexibility stem from its hybrid Germanic and Romance lexicon. For terminology creation, English demonstrates a strong preference for:

1. Graeco‑Latin Roots and Affixes: A vast reservoir of international combining forms: hydro‑, bio‑, micro‑, ‑ology, ‑scope.
2. Compounding: Both nominal – noun + noun: software, website and adjectival – adjective + noun: hardware, smartphone.
3. Conversion (Zero‑Derivation): Using words from one grammatical class as another: to google, a download.
4. Borrowing and Adaptation: Direct adoption of terms, especially in cutting‑edge fields: algorithm, angst, zeitgeist.

The Uzbek Terminological System

Uzbek terminology analysis have evolved through several phases. The Soviet era saw enormous Russification and loan translation from Russian models. Post‑1991 independence contributes a state‑led movement for linguistic sovereignty, seeking to “purify” and expand Uzbek terminology. Key characteristics incorporate:

1. Agglutinative Derivation: Heavy usage of native suffixes to generate new terms: ‑chi for agent nouns: sayyoh – tourist; ‑lash for verbal nouns: umumiy – general, umumiylash – generalization.
2. Revival and Semantic Extension of Turkic Roots: Using existent roots to name new concepts: yadro – core for nucleus; tarmoq – branch for network.
3. Direct Borrowing: From Arabic/Persian: qonun – law, iqtisod – economy; Russian: apparat – apparatus, stansiya – station, and increasingly from English: kompyuter, marketing, blog.

  During this study, some articles, writings are mastered profoundly. They included:

“An Introduction to Modern English Lexicology” by Jackson, H., and Amvela, E. Z. serves as informative source for understanding English lexicology system.

V.A. Tatarinov`s “Theory of terminology” can give detailed information about terminology, which assist to realize underlying of study.

“The Development of Terminological System in the Uzbek Language” by Shukurov Sh. interprets Uzbek terminological system. 

Methodology

This study utilizes a qualitative contrastive analysis based on the frameworks of descriptive terminology. The focus is on identifying, categorizing, and explaining similar and diverse sides in how the two languages construct and organize specialized vocabulary.

Data Analysis

The collected terms were analyzed along three primary axes:

1. Morphological Analysis: Each term was categorized by its formation process: derivation-prefixation/suffixation, compounding, borrowing-direct/adapted, calquing, acronymy.

2. Semantic‑Conceptual Analysis: Terms were mapped onto conceptual diagrams to recognize levels of equivalence:

   · Full Equivalence: One‑to‑one conceptual correspondence: oxygen – kislorod.

   · Partial Equivalence: Overlapping but non‑identical conceptual boundaries: law may correspond to qonun [statute] or huquq [law as a system/right].

   · Zero Equivalence (Conceptual Gap): A concept lexicalized in one language but not the other, requiring a definition, explanation or neologism.

Comparative analysis. This analysis could reveal that the English and Uzbek terminology system are evolved by distinct linguistic typologies, historical pathways, and socio-cultural priorities, leading to fundamentally various approaches to term creation and standardization.

 Results

 According to comparative analysis of term‑formation processes, English:

Compounding is King: The most effective method, especially in IT and business.

Graeco‑Latin Formatives: Ubiquitous in science and technology: ecosystem, biodiversity, telecommunications, microprocessor. These often act as internationalisms.

Phrasal Terms: Common in law and tourism: force majeure, last‑minute booking, intellectual property right.

Uzbek:

Agglutinative Derivation is Core: Suffixation is the primary generator. For instance, to create abstract nouns: barqaror (stable) → barqarorlik (stability); for agents: dastur (program) → dasturchi (programmer).

Calquing as a Strategic Filter: A prime response to English influence. It preserves the morpho‑syntactic construction of Uzbek while importing the concept: bulutli hisoblash (cloud computing), yashil iqtisodiyot (green economy), aqlli telefon (smartphone).

Selective Direct Borrowing: Common for highly specific, globally instantiated concepts: kompyuter, internet, blog, broker, drone. Borrowings from Russian often denote Soviet‑era institutional concepts (instruksiya, departament).

Noun‑Noun Compounds: Increasingly popular, mirroring English but with Uzbek word order: ma’lumotlar bazasi (data base), foydalanuvchi interfeysi (user interface).

Comparative Analysis of Semantic Structures

The analysis showed domain‑specific patterns of equivalence:

1. Information Technology: High degree of full equivalence for core hardware/network terms. For newer concepts, Uzbek employs calquing: kechikish – latency or borrowing. Partial equivalence exists where English employs metaphor absent in Uzbek: mouse is fully calqued as sichqoncha, losing the original metaphorical link.
2. Law: Significant partial equivalence and conceptual gaps an account of different legal traditions. English general law terms like trust, equity, or tort have no direct Uzbek equivalents and require explanatory translation. Huquq coats both law and right, leading to ambiguity. Calques from Russian law dominate the existing terminology: jinoyat kodeksi – criminal code.
3. Tourism: High degree of full equivalence for concrete services. English utilizes many French/Italian borrowings such as cuisine, concierge, while Uzbek may use Persian like mehmonxona or create descriptive compounds, such as suv osti safari – underwater safari.
4. Ecology: Many international Graeco‑Latin terms are borrowed directly into Uzbek like ekologiya, biodiversitet. For newer concepts, calquing is active: iqlim o‘zgarishi – climate change. Uzbek also utilizes native vocabulary for local ecological concepts, such as qumtepa – sand dune.
5. Business: A mix of direct borrowings like biznes, marketing, leasing and calques. English terminology is fluid and slang‑prone: bull market, unicorn startup, whereas Uzbek official terminology inclines towards formal calques or borrowings.

Conclusion

This comparative analysis has delineated the fundamental contours of the English and Uzbek terminological systems. English terminology, characterized by compounding, classical formatives, and a decentralized, usage‑based standardization model, serves a global, adaptable tool. Uzbek terminology, conversely, is defined by agglutinative derivation, strategic calquing, and a state‑led standardization drive, reflecting its dual mission of facilitating modern communication and affirming linguistic identity.

Recommendation

1. In university, teaching the principles of terminology and comparative analysis for future linguists and specialist can guarantee successful and usable development of terminology system.
2. Centering on standardizing terms in key, fast-changing fields like technology and low first enhances advance lexical adaptation.
3. When translating new concepts, prioritize creating clear Uzbek calques over simply borrowing the English word, which assists to develop Uzbek language.

Reference

1. Tatarinova V. A. “Theory of Terminology”.  Moskva: Nauka, 2015.

2. Shukurov Sh. “The Development of Terminological System in the Uzbek Language”. Toshkent: National University of Uzbekistan, 2020.

3. Jackson, H., and Amvela, E. Z.  “An Introduction to Modern English Lexicology”. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2007.

4. Cambridge University Press. (2019). Cambridge Dictionary of Education.

5. Crytal D. “English as Global Language”. Cambridge University Press, 2012.

6. Nurmonov A. “Development of Uzbek terminology”. Publisher: O`qituvchi, 2008.

we claim
not to be cats
yet our fur is up


uncoiling the snake
hidden strands of DNA


new diet
she only eats
the muffin tops


space station
blinks at me
I recite a  poem


1964 the summer of warped LPs


whiskers
in my gallery
cats


long before
it was complicated . . . 
it was complicated


finding all
the missing data
spam folder


her empty life
she collects vintage jars
to hold nothing


barman icing cocktails shrinkflation


2 am
the call that changed
our lives


rusty train tracks
nobody asks
where they go


breaking camp
in the lemongrass
field mice


chance of rain Silicon Valley in the cloud


lunch break
on city park bench
time with Buddha


designer shoes
she trips over her
privilege 


spilling their pain
so others know
survivors


upturned turtle
in the road
shell-shocked


pregnant . . . 
her dancing shoes
still fit


holding
my boots together
desert sand

Sewer Statue

Like a cast bronze statue

of an American allegator

emerging from the depths

of a metropolitan sewer,

my spirit materializes

from dank storm drains

committed to memory

and mischief, seeking

a response to absurd

allegiances, ridiculous norms

and would-be leaders’

relentless self-service

and childish rants.

Come rise, come rise,

come rise we all now

step beyond fields

of square marble tiles

that reaffirm conformity

and inspire superstition

amongst people who

dare to step on cracks

established, break molds,

and create human flocks

as devoted to tomfoolery as

they are to tucking sheets

without questions.

*****************************************

Murmuration

Coal black plumage on sabbatical

between spiritual and living worlds

ordinary yet mystical blackbirds

guided me away from gravesides

where I’d grown accustomed to tossing

handfuls of dirt onto coffins lowered

into burial holes, endeavoring to maintain

a stout face, warm heart, and reverent mind

as I paid last respects for people I’d lost

and those with dance cards to death’s final waltz.

Ebon speckled clouds lit up the skies

as the blackbirds moved between worlds

like holy ravens imparting omens,

plucking seeds from towering sunflowers,

spreading feathery imas—divine inspiration—

from the tips of their wings and naked beaks;

their melodious harmonies masked oracles

yet delighted my ears which eagerly absorbed

each mystical note, yet avoided eye contact

as tricksters’ shared sacred songs and healed.

*****************************************

Recycling

Like a frustrated mongoose

my USB-C iPhone plug cries out

refusing to recharge as waste paper

burst into flames and plastic endures.

Recycling chewing gum

by crafting teeth-marked chaws—

green, pink, yellow, blue, red,

orange, and purple lumps–

has changed; those days

of sticking it beneath chairs

came and went creative minds

into spearmint ashtrays,

cinnamon door stops,

and licorice paperweights.

I weigh my limited options

in a throwaway culture given to comfort.

seduced by streaming influencers.

mesmerized by celebrity.

*****************************************

Sin Salida Real

Dude ranch entrance signs promise

magical gateways—city slicker portals—

old west access to fatigued quarter horses

or docile mares along hoof hardened trails

each path an exit from the familiar

to an exotic, rugged thoroughfare

showcasing alien pastoral images

teasing one’s sight with kodak color

as the overwhelming scent of sapphire

orchards, blue moon wisteria,

dry eucalyptus, and lavender bundles

fill starved lungs with an ineffable

fragrance distilled in nature’s garden.

True, yes true! Ranch guests exercised

their olfactory senses in big city bellies

breathing in smog, choaking on smoke

inhaling car exhaust like unrefined narcotics

provided means and ends for many metropolitans

working where glass and steel structures

solemnly shaded select sidewalks 

at the whim of municipal planners,

free parking spots existed in memory,

as angry voices merged with the sound

of car horns, street minstrels and traffic.

Back at the dude ranch, city dwellers

reveled in roleplay, scraping horse shit

off of highly polished cowboy boots

shouting like fools as they attempt

to rope calves in small wooden corrals

answerable to no one but themselves

until country trysts and make believe

scenarios confuse dissembling with escape

exits beget entrances, portals lead to prisons.

*****************************************

Manatee Musings

For Anne Waldman

I

heard

Anne Waldman, called

Ginsburg’s spiritual wife,

her Angel Hair Anthology—

The Howl’s first cousin,

restlessly tranquil,

Buddha’s loins

issue a bold lineage,

a priceless odyssey

through light and shadow,

Outriders rocking on edges

of “The Jack Kerouac School

of Disembodied Poetics,”

meditation’s soft underbelly,

a manatee reminder.

Waldman’s soul revisits humanity,

encourages disparate voices:

unchecked,

uncensored,

unimpeded,

unconstrained,

responds to diaspora’s

social signals,

communities under siege,

Rupert Murdock’s minions

mind-numbing brainwash

of twisted truths, invented factoids,

political assignations.

Sing on like the manatee,

Anne, sing on.

A Washington-based author, poet, educator, and Pushcart Nominee, Sterling Warner’s works have appeared in such literary magazines, journals, and anthologies The Raven’s Perch, Lothlórien Poetry Journal, Ekphrastic Journal Review, Bewildering Stories, and Verse-Virtual. Warner has written over a dozen volumes of poetry/fiction including Without Wheels, ShadowCat, Edges, Memento Mori, Serpent’s Tooth, Flytraps: Poems, Cracks of Light: Pandemic Poetry & Fiction, Halcyon Days: Collected Fibonacci, Abraxas, Gunills’s, Garden: Poetry, Seaboard Magic (2026)—as well as Masques: Flash Fiction & Short Stories.  He currently writes, hosts “virtual” poetry/fiction readings, turns wood, and enjoys fishing and boating along the Hood Canal.

—————————————————————–

in a dumpster

a wet fart at three in the afternoon

a black woman taking advantage

of my kindness

a sunday driver on a thursday

40 in a 55, no place to pass

the mind drifts

lola by the kinks comes on

the radio

who hasn’t fallen for one

of those

the smell of burning rubber

another relic from the past

in a dumpster

hanging on to memories

that no one else wants

now on the highway

headed to somewhere even

less exciting

death just around the next

corner

ten more years to wait

never was any fucking

good at timing

——————————————————

the hamster

sometimes i feel like the hamster

that learned that fucking wheel

goes nowhere

wishing the water was actually

gin or vodka, maybe moonshine

and i really want to love

i really want to live

but all these years are conspiring

against me

too old for the obstacle course

too old to play these fucking

games

i’ll be over in the corner

ice on my back

shotgun ready for the

inevitable

save me or help me aim

each is an act of love

let that sink in

——————————————————

down to the bottom

sometimes the pain

becomes this anchor

dragging me down

to the bottom

all my friends are

down there

hide the needles

we start quoting kerouac

but no one wants to come

down from the mountain

someone pretends they

can play coltrane better

than anyone else

i tell the bartender to

cut that fucker off

give me all his drinks

eventually, i’ll slip

into the beyond

for a few minutes

embrace the nothingness

as the only thing that was

ever real

a broken kiss

and a final embrace

no such thing as goodbye

——————————————————

even the children

subtle beauty

lost in the wild lust

of a world trying to

die

no fucks given

no tomorrow ever

promised

even the children

can understand

impending doom

and all the beauty

can hear is laughter

never good enough

never loved enough

settled for one too

many one night stands

all just entries for a

diary no one ever

wanted to read

it all ends up in a

dive bar

snorting something

white just for kicks

a bourbon, a scotch

fuck, you know

the song

—————————————————-just a middle finger

no urgency in your kiss

reckless abandon has

left us all

a plea for help

in a world of

deaf ears

and sign language is more

than just a middle finger

somewhere burroughs puts

the apple on your head and

says it will all be over soon

enough

fucker won’t even cook

you up a shot

and this is what it is

one man’s tragedy is

some fucker’s delight

the tension so thick

you can taste it

your final escape

a lifetime of piss poor

choices

only a fool would ever

expect a better outcome

J.J. Campbell (1976 – ?) is old enough to know where the bodies are buried. He’s been widely published over the years, most recently at Yellow Mama, The Beatnik Cowboy, The Rye Whiskey Review, Night Owl Negative and Disturb the Universe Magazine. His most recent book, to live your dreams, published by Whiskey City Press, is available at Amazon.com. you can find it by clicking here: https://a.co/d/0frIpA15

Artificial Intelligence: The Creator’s Ally or Assassin?

I recently found myself in a heated debate with an acquaintance who made a rather chilling claim: “Soon, your writing won’t be worth a dime. AI will do it in seconds, for free, and most importantly, without a single mistake.” I fell silent for a moment. It’s a brutal, yet logically haunting thought, isn’t it? Are we—the creators, writers, artists, and architects of ideas—being stripped of our ancestral throne of “creativity”? Or is this just another wave of panic in the face of a technological revolution?

In reality, modern neural networks are essentially massive statistical vaults, a sophisticated dance of mathematical probabilities. They’ve devoured millions of texts and “digested” thousands of paintings. They can mimic Shakespeare’s prose, Van Gogh’s strokes, or Beethoven’s melodies. But one fundamental question remains unanswered: Why are they doing it? For an AI, creation is simply calculating the probability of where the next word or color should land. To a machine, the word “love” differs from “hate” only by its digital code. For a human, however, creation is pain, lived experience, and the sleepless nights hidden behind every period placed on a page. A machine can render a beautiful image, but its hands don’t tremble while drawing, and its heart doesn’t skip a beat with excitement.

In my view, artificial intelligence is not the assassin of the creator, but rather the arch-enemy of “mediocrity.” If your work consists merely of ready-made templates, repetitive thoughts, and soulless data, then yes—admittedly—AI will replace you easily and mercilessly. Machines understand patterns better than humans ever will. But your personal character, your past traumas, and those peculiar, sometimes irrational, yet deeply sincere perspectives—no algorithm can replicate that.

History shows us that when the camera was first invented, painters spiraled into a similar panic: “Art is dead! Everything looks real now; we are obsolete!” But what actually happened? Painting didn’t vanish; instead, it evolved. Artists moved away from simply copying the external world and began to capture its inner essence and emotion—giving birth to Impressionism, Cubism, and Abstraction. The camera wasn’t a rival; it became a powerful new tool. Today, AI is our modern “brush” or “pen.” It assists us with the mundane and the tedious: fixing grammar, brainstorming ideas, or structuring drafts. But the final spark that breathes “life” into a piece of work still comes from the human soul.

I envision the future as a bipolar landscape. On one side, there will be an endless flood of AI-generated content—cheap, fast, and superficial. You could compare it to “fast-food creativity”: it fills the stomach but leaves the spirit starving. On the other side, work crafted by human hands, beautiful in its imperfections and smelling of personality, will become a true luxury. People will grow weary of the machine-generated perfection and begin to crave human sincerity—that unique, slightly “chaotic” touch of a real person.

Ultimately, artificial intelligence is a vast mirror. It reflects the world we know, the texts we’ve written, and the images we’ve dreamt up. It is neither my friend nor my assassin. It is my echo. As long as I have my own thoughts, my own voice, and a unique word to say to the world, no line of code can ever take my place. Therefore, it’s time to stop the fruitless struggle against technology and start learning how to wield it. In this new era where “Chaos” reigns, only those creators who refuse to lose themselves will survive.

Shahnoza Amonboyeva— A student of the Faculty of Computer Engineering at Urgench State University, an explorer carving her path at the intersection of technology and creativity. She is the author of several analytical articles, with her work featured in prestigious anthologies. An active participant in international quiz competitions, she holds numerous certificates and official membership in an international association. Her current academic goals include winning the University Rector’s Scholarship and prestigious national named scholarships. Looking ahead, she aims to become a leading expert in her field by enhancing her professional qualifications in various countries worldwide.

My Baby Moon

I miss you

as the lonely nights pass

your silence slowing the wind

blinking back the tips of tears

I stand still

finally stooping to my knees

the grass moist and cold

a comet from my heart

breaking loose

streaking upward to you

my love

My Love

please

remember me.

Touching

I’ve written thousands of poems

never sent

to you

undercover all over the internet

thinking somehow you would know

they are for you

telling of my soul

within the multiple waves of thought

and the secrecy of the heart

our minds

somehow touching

with a sphere of imagination

and truth.

Forever

The way

before us

within our living

and wondering

an wakening

open eyed

and beating hearts revolving

around a swirl of emotions

dictating and delivering

a life

heavenly directed

and bound

solid in each other’s

grip of forever youth.