Imagining a future in higher ed: a room full of human powered writing machines
Though many of you who know me personally know I am something of a futurist, I’m penning this short post to advocate for a nuanced position regarding the use of new technologies in an educational space.
While much of the education fervor at the turn of the millennium focused on the acquisition of computer skills and integration of computer technology in the classroom, the (seemingly) sudden rise of so-called AI tools have caused a major disruption to the mission of educational institutions serving students at any age and their deployment of technology in educational pursuit. This is no surprise to anyone even remotely involved in or familiar with education, administration, or legislation.
But increasingly, education institutions, perhaps fearing an incorrect perception of being ‘left-behind,’ have charged headlong into designing curriculum around the assumption and integration of these AI tools - a direct reflection of the same push toward computer literacy experienced by students of the Y2K era, but without the substance of those older initiatives. While those previous initiatives were seemingly well intentioned, there is an error in trusting that AI usage skills will translate into meaningful skillsets and meaningful knowledge production at the university level. This vis-a-vis likening between these two historical moments is a dangerous mistake that will end up as a long term disservice to our students and to the future of our institutions.
As a result of this misplaced focus, computer literacy itself has been left behind; many of the college-age students I now encounter have practically zero computer literacy skills. Navigating file systems? Unknown. Diagnosing simple connectivity problems? Unknown. Simple programming of tools and scripts? You already can guess. Instead of maintaining a focus on computers as a broad-use tool, it seems that the larger cultural movement has been toward the consumer-centered deployment of computer programs rather than the actual informed use of the technology. A movement toward greater computer literacy is very important (and a personal project of mine), but not the focus of this document. Institutional motion toward full computer literacy must exist along deeper educational initiatives focused on skills closer to human “metal.”
The progression toward the adoption of AI is a similar cultural movement - administrative bodies believe they are doing the right thing by having students interact directly with the newest technology in an effort to make them competitive in the broken job market following their (hopeful) matriculation beyond our walls. This is a misleading connection to make between the computer literacy of the millennial generation and the integration of AI into workflows for Gen Z and Gen Alpha students: the technologies do not exist in the same positionality to knowledge generation and the development of necessary cognitive skills for future success.
It is now the case that many professors, like myself, are moving back to pen and paper assessments in class. I have instituted a rule in my courses that students are required to take pen and paper notes in class and will receive points for demonstrating at least basic note-taking techniques. These methods are a small step toward better thinking, but not the whole project - short answers will only get one so far with challenging concepts that evolve and recompose themselves through the long process of composition-as-thought.
But how do we assess longer form thinking? I assert here that long-form writing is absolutely necessary for students to work through their ideas and establish critical thought.
This is a time when bold initiatives are required from institutions and my bold suggestion is this: a room filled with typewriters and a human proctor. Universities preparing for the future must be aware of developments in the AI space, but be emphatic and deliberate in educating students with particular attention to human cognition, writing, and logical thinking without the use of AI. This step will require an infrastructure that is relatively low-tech and human focused.
The typewriters will all be housed in a large space to be overseen by one or several human proctors. These proctors will be available for technical assistance, but primarily serve to monitor that students are not using technology that would or could circumvent the writing process- no laptops, phones, or listening devices. Proctors would also keep student assignments under lock and key in the space, and set finished assignments aside in special folders that the office itself would deliver to professors; at no point would students handle the paper except to turn it in to the proctor either for keeping (if they intend to return and work more), or if their writing is completed and they wish for the assignment to be securely submitted to their professor.
This system, while still needing greater clarification and detailed logistics that maintain integrity of student work, would function to ensure that university students continue to engage in meaningful writing and composition assignments without the cognitive offload (read, surrender) of AI system interfacing. Naturally, this sort of project requires space, typewriters, ink, paper, worker-hours, filing cabinets, tons of folders, stamps, etc. But the real challenge lies in universities thinking and acting boldly to ensure that our students are thinking, reading, writing, and growing.
AI may have certain uses that do not lead, necessarily, to cognitive offload; the AI can act as a “study-buddy” and pose appropriate questions to a student in a mock quiz or mock test format. I believe this use and other uses are worth exploring, but the wholesale surrender to AI by educational institutions must stop. These products are weakening our students’ ability to think critically about their world and make decisions in an effective and informed manner.
Bold thought and decisive action will be necessary for the future of the university and the future of the vivid democracy its students (hope to) live in!
More to come on this topic!
