What does every academic need to know about generative AI?

An initial note as I prepare this 1 hour briefing session for later this year:

• The capabilities of generative AI have grown significantly in just over three years since ChatGPT’s launch in November 2022. These aren’t the tentative, error-prone systems we saw initially. They’re increasingly fluent and capable.
• The uptake has been just as rapid. ChatGPT now has 800 million weekly active users globally. This isn’t a technology we’re preparing for — it’s already mainstream.
• The technology is still developing, but differently. We’re seeing less dramatic improvement in the underlying models and more emphasis on software integration and new functionality. The focus has shifted from making models smarter to making them more embedded in how we work.
• There’s strong evidence that most students in UK universities are now using generative AI at least some of the time. HEPI’s 2025 data shows 92% of undergraduates have used these tools, with 88% using them in assessment.
• There are many ways students can use AI which aren’t problematic. It’s crucial we don’t assume that any use is cheating. The spectrum runs from using LLMs to explain concepts through to wholesale outsourcing of intellectual work. These aren’t the same thing.
• When use is problematic, we need to understand why rather than simply blaming the student or the technology. Unclear guidance, impossible workloads, and struggling with paid work commitments all shape how students engage with these tools. This is a sociological phenomenon, not just a moral one.
• There’s a need for teaching teams and disciplinary communities to guide students about what university policy means in practice within their specific context. What counts as legitimate use differs between philosophy and computing, between first-year and doctoral work. One-size-fits-all policy fails.
• This means learning to have conversations with students in which we acknowledge our own uncertainty and anxieties about these issues. We can’t perform certainty we don’t have. The method is honest dialogue, not prescription.
• There are going to be significant changes over the next couple of years as firms come under pressure to make their offerings profitable. The current pricing is a loss leader — it can’t last. We should expect the tools to change, possibly to degrade, in ways that will affect how viable they are for institutional use.
• There’s substantial growth in AI companions and other applications designed to foster attachment behaviours. We’re likely to see this increasingly in our students. We can’t assume AI tools are just tools for everyone — for some students, they’re relationships. This changes the pastoral and pedagogical challenge we’re facing.

This text generated by Claude 4.5 Sonnet from initial bullet points, drawing on a knowledge base of all my published writing on generative AI.

#AI #artificialIntelligence #ChatGPT #education #generativeAI #higherEducation #technology #universities

Texas A&M banned these Plato readings from my class. Here’s what everyone should know about his teachings. – MS NOW

Opinion

Texas A&M told me not to teach these Plato readings. That’s not how you make universities great again.

The Greek philosopher explicitly urged his students to seek the truth — even when it was uncomfortable or controversial. So should universities.

“Plato explicitly urged his students to seek the truth — even when it was uncomfortable or controversial.” Ben King / MS NOW; Getty Images

By Martin Peterson, Jan. 10, 2026, 6:00 AM EST

As a professor of philosophy and ethics, I am more accustomed to reading the news than being a part of it. But many media outlets have reported this week on a directive I was given to excise Plato lessons from a course syllabus. I offer this to provide insight into my experiences at Texas A&M both recently and more broadly.

I have been to Athens many times, and on every visit I make a point of stopping by the site of Plato’s Academy, the world’s first university, founded around 387 BCE. Whereas other schools at the time primarily trained students in rhetoric and the art of winning debates, Plato explicitly urged his students to seek the truth — even when it was uncomfortable or controversial. It is precisely this attitude toward teaching and research that has made American universities the best in the world. We do not Make Universities Great Again by censoring the classics.

We do not Make Universities Great Again by censoring the classics.

The ban on teaching Plato’s “Symposium” at Texas A&M is, in a sense, understandable. If one accepts the university rule, adopted in November, that bans the teaching of “race and gender ideology,” Plato joins a long list of prominent thinkers whose ideas might be deemed corrupting to youth and therefore subject to censorship.

In the “Symposium,” Plato describes homosexuality as fully natural and suggests that there are more than two genders: “you should learn the nature of humanity … in times past our nature was not the same as it is now, but otherwise. For in the first place there were three kinds of human being and not two as nowadays, male and female. No, there was also a third kind, a combination of both genders.”

Editor’s Note: Read the rest of the story, at the below link.

Continue/Read Original Article Here: Texas A&M banned these Plato readings from my class. Here’s what everyone should know about his teachings.
#BansTeachingPlato #GenderIdeology #HigherEducation #Humanity #MartinPeterson #MSNOW #MSNBC #Philosophy #Plato #Professor #RaceIdeology #Symposium #Teaching #Texas #TexasAMUniversity #WesternEducation

Journal Article: Generative AI in Higher Education: A Bibliometric Review of Emerging Trends, Power Dynamics, and Global Research Landscapes

The article linked below was recently published by Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence.

Title

Generative AI in Higher Education: A Bibliometric Review of Emerging Trends, Power Dynamics, and Global Research Landscapes

Authors

Kun Dai
The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Yabing Liu
The Education University of Hong Kong

Xiaofan Zhang
The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Source

Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence
Online: January 9, 2026

Abstract

The rapid evolution of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is reshaping higher education (HE), offering transformative opportunities for academic engagement while posing significant challenges to academic integrity, ethical frameworks, and global research power dynamics. This study maps the recent (2022-2025) research landscape of GenAI in HE through a bibliometric analysis of 2762 articles from the Web of Science Core Collection. Employing multipolarity as an analytical lens, this study examines the power dynamics within this research domain reflected by publication records from different countries (or regions). Findings highlight surging global interest in GenAI in HE, with contributions led by the US, China, and the UK, alongside rising participation from non-Western scholars and institutions. By identifying the major topics, this study uncovers a more nuanced trajectory of GenAI-related discourse in HE. By examining publication status, contributors, and research topics, this study provides insights for stakeholders navigating the complexities of GenAI integration into HE and suggests trajectories for future research in this rapidly evolving field.

Keyword Co-Occurrence Networks Visualization Map Source:10.1016/j.caeai.2026.100544

1-s2.0-S0099133325001934-mainDownload PDF from here.

See original article ScienceDirect: sciencedirect.com/science/arti…

Read original article at InfoDocket: Read More
#AIArticle #ComputersAndEducationArtificialIntelligence #GenAI #HigherEducation #HongKong #Impacts #infoDOCKET #January92026 #Research #ScienceDirect #ScienceDirect #UK #UnitedStates

Much discussion of digital education focuses on platforms, tools, and artificial intelligence. What is often less visible is how these systems quietly shape pedagogy itself, influencing assessment practices, learner agency, and what counts as legitimate learning.

I have published a short executive overview that brings together several years of writing on critical digital pedagogy, platformed learning, and assessment in the age of artificial intelligence. The central argument is that many of the challenges we attribute to technology are pedagogical and institutional rather than technical.

The post is here:
e-learning-rules.com/blog/0058…

I am interested in this as an open conversation rather than a settled position.

In your own context, where do digital platforms most strongly shape pedagogy by default, and what does it mean in practice to reclaim pedagogical intent?

Hashtags
#DigitalPedagogy #eLearning #HigherEducation #AIinEducation #CriticalPedagogy #edtech

A lone scholar in academic robes studies a glowing circuit-like screen above a maze-like digital city, with a large planet rising in a retro 1970s sci-fi sky.