One of the main fun to go to school and campus to talk about More than just words: How to think about writing in the AI era How should I deal with writing teaching is the opportunity to see the challenges of working in generative AI technology elsewhere.
My trips so far have been very encouraging. Obviously, in the earlier times of worry and uncertainty, we are in a new stage of rational consideration. I’ve never seen a total panic, but there is bad luck in the air.
On the institutional side, there may be choice bias, which invites people like me to work with them, but there is an obvious urge to figure out how to move forward according to institutional values rather than being trapped in a defensive posture.
As I announced in December 2022, “Chatgpt can’t kill anything worth keeping.” The work that must be kept and certainly how it is done.
I want to share some impressions that I think is working well in a forward-looking institution, so others may consider that they might want to do the job on their own campus.
Attack by realizing your own values
One obvious commonality in successfully addressing current challenges is to identify core institutional values and then make them central to the ongoing discussion of how teaching and institutional operations develop.
As an example, during my recent visit to Iona University, I was introduced to their framework of agency, expression and responsibility.
When talking about learning, “agents” are one of my favorite words, in this case, which means that in order to communicate with students, ultimately you have to choose your own educational path, including using AI technology. Recently, I have been talking more and more about AI in education as a demand-side problem, and students need to see the trap of outsourcing learning. The agent takes it to its responsibility: to the student themselves.
Expression represents a belief that the ultimate goal of one’s education is to develop our unique voice as part of the larger world in which we work and live. Writing not only produces text, but also uses expression tools (including text) to convey our perspective to the world. Where LLM uses alternatives or masks our personal expression, they should be avoided.
Responsibility is related to agency in the sense of “giant responsibility with powerful strength”. Students are encouraged to consider the practical and ethical dimensions of using the technology.
On other sites, I see similar directions, although usually wrinkles unique to the local environment. A common value is to, rather than retreat to assessments that can be monitored to prevent cheating, to figure out how to give life to the multiple educational experiences we know.
If you start with value, you can evaluate things like strategies based on what makes sense and lasting. The conversation becomes more productive because everyone works on a shared basis.
I know this can be done because I’ve been visiting institutions working on this for over 18 months and the progress is real.
Collective and collaborative action
Another common sign of progress is institutional leadership, conveying a desire to take a collective approach to problem solving, and then put specific, tangible resources behind this call to make collaborative action more possible and effective.
Several institutions I visited have carved attractions for certain versions of AI teacher researchers, where these researchers are free to explore the technology and its specific meaning for the discipline before returning to the group and institutional environment that share this learning.
To work, these have to be more than figuring out how to integrate AI technology into the university community. I haven’t visited any agency that does this yet – they’re unlikely to invite people like me – but I’ve been correspondence with people who are seeking advice to do this, which seems to be a sure route to the divisive agency.
During my Iona visit, they took this approach to the next level by having a one-day meeting and invited community educators across walks not only to hear your truth, but also to hear discussions from AI Fellows and other teachers.
These meetings don’t solve all the problems in one day, but are just encouraging to prove to the wider public that the issues you are working on are.
Space and Difference
One of my favorite parts of my visit was the opportunity to talk to faculty on campus who have been struggling with the challenges I took my time. On a basic level, we share the same values in the appearance of learning and the importance of things like agency and transparency.
However, when it comes to generative AI technology to achieve these results, there are often big differences. I share my views, theirs, and while I don’t think we will necessarily change each other’s minds, I have a great appreciation for different views.
This is my model of academic conversations that are always based on the course, where the purpose of writing and speaking is to gradually increase the amount of lighting on hand. We are discussing, not “debate.”
I am more skeptical and cautious than many. I often point out that anyone who uses the technology effectively today has built many capabilities (or what I call “practice”) without this technology, so it is reasonable to think that we should still be educated without interacting with the technology or using it.
But I also saw a tangible demonstration of integrating the ability to generate AI tools in a way that truly opens up potential new avenues. These people need to continue experimenting, just as those of us who want to find our job without AI should have the right to do so.
It’s not just about “going to school”
Maybe it’s part of the first point of the “offensive”, but the success I’ve seen comes from the willingness to fundamentally question the education system, which allows students to observe their education primarily through the trading lens.
In many cases, the generated AI output satisfies the school’s transactions in a way that means students get nothing. We all read viral articles about students using AI in everything they do.
But I can report from visits to many different agencies and talk to more people, which is not universally true. Many students are eager to engage in activities that help them learn. This will then become the responsibility of the school and the lecturer to make students worth doing something worth doing.
Retreat to simulated form because it is a missed opportunity to rethink and redo what we know is not particularly good.
This kind of rethinking has no end. To be honest, I found it energetic and it was obvious that others did the same. This energy is something we can use to help students.
