Raiding the inarticulate since 2010

accelerated academy acceleration agency AI Algorithmic Authoritarianism and Digital Repression archer Archive Archiving artificial intelligence automation Becoming Who We Are Between Post-Capitalism and Techno-Fascism big data blogging capitalism ChatGPT claude Cognitive Triage: Practice, Culture and Strategies Communicative Escalation and Cultural Abundance: How Do We Cope? Corporate Culture, Elites and Their Self-Understandings craft creativity critical realism data science Defensive Elites desire Digital Capitalism and Digital Social Science Digital Distraction, Personal Agency and The Reflexive Imperative Digital Elections, Party Politics and Diplomacy digital elites Digital Inequalities Digital Social Science Digital Sociology digital sociology Digital Universities elites Fragile Movements and Their Politics Cultures generative AI higher education Interested labour Lacan Listening LLMs margaret archer Organising personal morphogenesis Philosophy of Technology platform capitalism platforms populism Post-Democracy, Depoliticisation and Technocracy post-truth psychoanalysis public engagement public sociology publishing Reading realism reflexivity scholarship Shadow Mobilization, Astroturfing and Manipulation Social Media Social Media for Academics social media for academics social ontology social theory sociology technology The Content Ecosystem The Intensification of Work The Political Economy of Digital Capitalism The Technological History of Digital Capitalism Thinking trump twitter Uncategorized work writing zizek

AI in higher education is going to get worse before it gets better

This internal blog post at Manchester is largely about our new AI in Teaching and Learning policy but I wanted to share this section which is more broadly true:

AI in assessment is a classic example of a wicked problem. There are only better or worse options, involving trade offs. If we imagine that a classification system is going to resolve the problem so that we can return to the status quo ex ante, we are failing to look at the sheer scale of the technological challenges which are still emerging. From coding agents through to the rapid growth of wearable computing, from AI companions through to AI labs ‘enshittifying’ their models, the emerging challenges are even more consequential than the ones we’ve faced since the launch of OpenAI’s ChatGPT in November 2022. If we can’t solve these problems, we can at least make sure we are moving in the right direction. Initiating a deeper conversation about what AI means for teaching and learning is a necessary condition for that forward movement. Nearly two years ago The Russell Group principles called for “Engagement and dialogue between academic staff and students” in order to “establish a shared understanding of the appropriate use of generative AI tools”. It was essential that “this dialogue is regular and ongoing will be vital given the pace at which generative AI is evolving”.

https://blogs.manchester.ac.uk/itl/2026/06/19/building-a-working-consensus-on-ai-in-teaching-and-learning/