An excellent piece on one of my favorite subjects -- demands for "sameness" in higher ed, whether sameness in syllabi, curricula, metrics that reveal nothing about any particular student. I love that you articulate the potential of AI to disrupt sameness! Everyone uses it differently for different ends.
Thanks, Hollis. Like I said at the end, I'm getting more interested in non-institutional forms of higher learning as ways to change institution of higher learning. The technology itself is less interesting than what becomes of attempts to embrace or avoid it.
I’ve been trying to encourage more conversations among faculty on my campus, beyond either the promotional (here’s a workshop on AI) or the totally avoidant (ban it from everything). And even on a very small campus, with a very small faculty, it’s so difficult! People really don’t want to talk to one another right now (I think they fear it). I’ve been approaching it with ambivalence in mind as an aim, but I think pluralism is probably more appealing (though they are not unrelated!)
Ambivalence seems as crucial as fallibilism and pluralism...a kind of armor against fanatical enthusiasms about how great it all is or similarly fanatical skepticism that leads to despair.
An excellent piece on one of my favorite subjects -- demands for "sameness" in higher ed, whether sameness in syllabi, curricula, metrics that reveal nothing about any particular student. I love that you articulate the potential of AI to disrupt sameness! Everyone uses it differently for different ends.
Thanks, Hollis. Like I said at the end, I'm getting more interested in non-institutional forms of higher learning as ways to change institution of higher learning. The technology itself is less interesting than what becomes of attempts to embrace or avoid it.
I’ve been trying to encourage more conversations among faculty on my campus, beyond either the promotional (here’s a workshop on AI) or the totally avoidant (ban it from everything). And even on a very small campus, with a very small faculty, it’s so difficult! People really don’t want to talk to one another right now (I think they fear it). I’ve been approaching it with ambivalence in mind as an aim, but I think pluralism is probably more appealing (though they are not unrelated!)
Ambivalence seems as crucial as fallibilism and pluralism...a kind of armor against fanatical enthusiasms about how great it all is or similarly fanatical skepticism that leads to despair.