2026· Journal of Communication Pedagogy· 0 citations· 5 references
TL;DR
It is argued that AI did not break teaching, it revealed aspects of teaching that have long required greater attention and intentionality and should be focused on clarifying the purposes of teaching and learning.
Abstract
The rapid emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has prompted widespread concern about academic integrity, student learning, and the future of higher education. While AI is often framed as a disruptive force, this commentary argues that many of the challenges attributed to AI predate the technology itself. Rather than creating new problems, AI has exposed long-standing tensions embedded within higher education and communication pedagogy. Three tensions that have become increasingly visible in the presence of AI are identified: learning versus completion, efficiency versus depth, and human connection versus algorithmic mediation. First, AI challenges assumptions that the successful completion of assignments necessarily reflects meaningful learning. Second, it highlights the growing emphasis on efficiency within educational systems despite the fact that communication learning often requires reflection, revision, and sustained engagement. Third, AI underscores the relational nature of teaching by revealing the limitations of simulated interaction in comparison to authentic human communication. Communication faculty are uniquely positioned to respond to these tensions because communication education has long emphasized critical thinking, interpersonal engagement, and relational learning. Rather than responding to AI with additional policies, educators should focus on clarifying the purposes of teaching and learning. Ultimately, the article argues that AI did not break teaching, it revealed aspects of teaching that have long required greater attention and intentionality.
It is argued that universities should train and encourage students to use ChatGPT, as it is likely to become a common tool in the workplace and the importance of preparing students for a future that embraces AI technologies is highlighted.
A. Talib· INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOC...· 0 citations
Analysis of student-AI interaction patterns, common sources of error in AI-generated solutions, and students’ perceptions of generative AI in the context of linear programming reveals that whereas AI-generated responses often correctly formulated decision variables, objective functions, and constraints, errors frequent...
Yeawon Yoo, Sydney Kim· INFORMS Transactions on Educ...· 0 citations
AI acts primarily as an amplifying tool rather than an independent driver of academicbehavior, reflecting pre-existing attitudes toward learning and ethics, suggesting pre-existing attitudes toward learning and ethics are reflected.
Aleksandar Vučković, Ernest Vlačić, A. Davidovic· Notitia· 0 citations
The Instructional Model for Human-Centered Generative AI Engagement is introduced, a pedagogical framework designed to help faculty guide students in engaging with generative AI as a thinking partner rather than a shortcut.
A. Miles, Paige Haber-Curran, Khalid H. Arar· Open Praxis· 0 citations
An assignment developed for a large-enrollment, 100-level, general-education, environmental science course at the University of Arizona that provides students with structured opportunities to experiment with and critically evaluate GenAI tools.
T. Crimmins, K. Prudic· Prompt A Journal of Academic...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.