Music theorist, early music specialist, mezzo soprano, feminist, yogi, hiker. Into equitable pedagogy. Author of Hearing Homophony (OUP 2020: http://bit.ly/341RhmB). She/her/hers.
Megan Non Brevis
Loading...
“AI will replace college learning” declares a journalist who never acknowledges the ethical problems or factuality issues inherent in LLMs nor intimates that content and skills are in fact different in kind, and that kids go to college for the latter.
“Will the university survive?” asks a skeptic who never once acknowledges that the university is an institution nearly a thousand years old that has survived *checks notes* a lot of major social and technological upheavals between then and now.
“College professors need to articulate a collective vision for an educated populace” wails an essayist who interviewed only college administrators and not a single professor for his series.
TBF these publications could also try putting someone on the higher ed beat who has … literally any relevant knowledge or experience of higher ed.
See also: would you like to engage in live skeeting of lessons and carols and/or the encyclical
“College isn’t good value anymore” bemoans a college educated knowledge worker who never once acknowledges that most students don’t pay sticker price for college and that college has benefits that extend beyond salary five years after graduation.
I hate to say it, but the colleagues positioning themselves to be pro AI in teaching and curriculum, are probably also positioning themselves to be administrators, and probably aren’t thinking about or don’t care how it will affect teaching, learning, or the careers of those around them.
