I would say that on the whole, Chat-based LLMs ("AI") have been a large negative impact on higher education. They are good enough now that mediocre to poor undergraduate students (or whole institutions with average students) will receive better grades on assignments generated by AI than if they did it themselves (at least in the disciplines I am familiar with). Or, if not better then comparable with no effort expended.
The short-sighted benefits are just too overwhelming that even for students who arguably have skin in the education game (most do not and merely are there for credentialing) , it is a difficult battle - akin to the generation(s) who recognize that the type and amount of their social media use is problematic but react with resignation.
There is a difference between 'knowing' and 'doing things' - the consequences of AI are different across these.
Some other thoughts:
- I do not think there are any viable solutions to the AI 'problem' in education given the current structure of higher education.
- The affordances, the motivations and practical, if not overt, purpose of 'education' cannot meet AI head on.
- A stronger more explicit distinction needs to be (re-)drawn between what used to be 'vocational' and 'liberal' or 'higher' education. And a narrowing of the purpose of higher education (which would, in itself, be very disruptive)
- There needs to be an explicit addressing of AI in both curricula -- in terms of both practical training on its use as well as the pitfalls and downsides-- in terms of self-interest (e.g. if you have machines do the work to set you 'free' then you run the risk of becoming slaves to the people who make the machines (paraphrased Dune).
- Complete change in approach and most importantly assessment -- I am not sure this can be done in a system where grades are still the litmus test for learning.
- This educational crisis has to be addresssed BEFORE college- otherwise it is probably too late.
A few points.
- how do you think assessment would change? As someone who didn't prioritize standardized tests bc my parents thought they were dumb, I was almost optimistic that very advanced AI systems could make assessment obsolete. If the AI is constantly watching out you pick up things and how often you need help, then the assessment is embedded.
- I am older Gen Z, and I definitely struggle with social media use. But I also would say I had a ton of skin in the education game. To this point, I think even with great AI, we'll just see further stratification. If someone wants to learn something, genuinely, then they will learn that thing. I don't think AI changes that.
- At a macro-level? I honestly do not know if it will at least in my life-time. And, if it does, it won't be due to higher education being proactive. What I can say is that I have a number of colleagues who are doing all paper and pen, in-class assessment. But this will not work for all disciplines.
- I agree that those who want to learn will learn. And for these individuals, generic higher education isn't that valuable anyway. However, I am a bit pessimistic about the number that represents, on the whole.
And, short-term goals and constraints can undermine these individuals. As with most things, the problem isn't with the thing but with the humans who wield it.