Did anyone else think there were several transitions that seemed like pure GPTisms?
> This isn’t innovation—it’s institutional auto-cannibalism. The new mission statement? Optimization.
AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
21–30 of 56 posts
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
The core premise is decidedly naive and simplistic -- AI is used to cheat and students can't be trusted with it. This thesis is carried through the entirety of the article.
You can straw man all you like, I haven't used an LLM in a few days -- definitely not to summarize this article -- and what you claim is the central idea, is directly related to my claim. Its very easy to combine them directly: students intellectual development is going to be impaired by AI because they can't be trusted to use it critically. I disagree.
When AI tools make it easy to cruise through coursework without learning anything then many students will just choose to do that? Intellectual development requires strenuous work and if universities no longer make students strain then most won’t. I don’t understand why you think otherwise.
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#23Good article though rather than philosphizing about lost souls, we probably should go back to the future.
Pen-and-paper exams only. No take-home essays or assignments. Assessments done in person under supervision. No devices in class. Heavily reduced remote learning or online coursework. Coursework redesigned so that any out-of-class work is explicitly AI-collaborative. Frequent low-stakes in-class writing to verify student voice and baseline ability. And when resources permit have oral exams and presentations as a means of assessment.
We did this for decades when tuition was a fraction of today's cost. Any argument that we can't return to basics is bollocks.
If you're trying to hawk education for $$$$$$, probably need to offer some actual human instruction, not Zoom and Discord sessions that anyone could run from their bedroom.
If they can't, then the rot and capture really is as bad as this makes out, and to update Will Hunting: the kids might as well save $150k and get their learning for $20/month on ChatGPT.
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is such a naive, simplistic, distrusting and ultimately monastic perspective This is such a disingenuous take on the article, there's nothing naive or simplistic about it, it's literally full of critical thought linking to more critical thought of other academic observers to what's happening at the educational level. The context in your reply implies you read at most the first 10% of the article. The article f…
The core premise is decidedly naive and simplistic -- AI is used to cheat and students can't be trusted with it. This thesis is carried through the entirety of the article.
So you believe students don't use AI to cheat, and you are calling the OP naive?
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
The core premise is decidedly naive and simplistic -- AI is used to cheat and students can't be trusted with it. This thesis is carried through the entirety of the article.
You can straw man all you like, I haven't used an LLM in a few days -- definitely not to summarize this article -- and what you claim is the central idea, is directly related to my claim. Its very easy to combine them directly: students intellectual development is going to be impaired by AI because they can't be trusted to use it critically. I disagree.
> You can straw man all you like
No one is misrepresenting your argument, it's well understood and being argued that it is false.
> students intellectual development is going to be impaired by AI because they can't be trusted to use it critically.
This debate is going nowhere so I'll end here. Your core premise is on trust and student autonomy, which is nonsense and not what the article tackles.
It argues LLM literally don't facilitate cognitive brain development and can actually impair it, irrelevant to how they are used so it's malpractice for university admins to adopt it as a learning tool in a setting where the primary goal should be cognitive development.
Student's are free to do as they please, it's their brain, money and life. Though I've never heard anyone argue they were their wisest in their teens and twenties as a student so the argument that students should be left unguided is also nonsense.
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#26This is such a naive, simplistic, distrusting and ultimately monastic perspective. An assumption here is that university students are uncritical and incapable of learning while utilizing AI as an instrument of mind. I think a much more prescient assessment would be that presence of AI demands a transformation and evolution of university curricula and assessment - and the author details early attempts at this -- but d…
[dead]
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#27Good article though rather than philosphizing about lost souls, we probably should go back to the future. Pen-and-paper exams only. No take-home essays or assignments. Assessments done in person under supervision. No devices in class. Heavily reduced remote learning or online coursework. Coursework redesigned so that any out-of-class work is explicitly AI-collaborative. Frequent low-stakes in-class writing to verify…
My parents had oral exams in university. I feel like that actually is a better format that does not rewarding cramming, but is interactive and over quicker. It means that there is a dynamic that actually allows for grading problem solving over regurgitation.
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#28Did anyone else think there were several transitions that seemed like pure GPTisms? > This isn’t innovation—it’s institutional auto-cannibalism. The new mission statement? Optimization.
Yep
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#29> As philosopher Peter Hershock observes, we don’t merely use technologies; we participate in them. With tools, we retain agency—we can choose when and how to use them. With technologies, the choice is subtler: they remake the conditions of choice itself. A pen extends communication without redefining it; social media transformed what we mean by privacy, friendship, even truth. That doesn't feel right. I thought that…
That is perfectly on topic and you are identifying correctly flaw in the argument Technology is neutral it’s always been neutral it will be neutral I quote Bertrand Russell on this almost every day: “As long as war exists all new technology will be utilized for war” You can abstract this away from “war” into anything that’s undesirable in society. What people are dealing with now is the newest transformational techno…
> Technology is neutral it’s always been neutral it will be neutral
I agree with a lot of what you say here but not this. People choose what to make easy and what to make more difficult with technology all the time. This does not make something neutral. Obviously something as simple as a hammer is more neutral but this doesn't extend to software systems.
Re: AI Is Destroying the University and Learning Itself
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
The core premise is decidedly naive and simplistic -- AI is used to cheat and students can't be trusted with it. This thesis is carried through the entirety of the article.
So you believe students don't use AI to cheat, and you are calling the OP naive?
ChatGPT told them otherwise.
Seriously, you’re arguing with people who have severe mental illness. One loon downthread genuinely thinks this will transform these students into “genuises”