Jul 2026· PS: Political Science and Politics· Vol 59, pp. 731 - 738· 1 citation· 17 references
Abstract
ABSTRACT Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has provoked polarized reactions in higher education, ranging from fears of plagiarism and the “death of the college essay” to claims of pedagogical transformation. Political science, in which writing remains central to learning, is at the center of this debate. This study advances a critical middle ground, arguing that generative AI should be treated as neither an existential threat nor a pedagogical shortcut but instead as a tool whose use must be structured around accountability, critical literacy, and equity. By synthesizing scholarship on AI in higher education, writing-as-process pedagogy, and educational inequality, this article challenges the “replacement” logic that equates writing with text production and examines the limits of framing AI as a neutral assistant. It introduces Disclose and Defend Pedagogy, a design framework that organizes pedagogical responses to AI along two dimensions—openness and accountability—and incorporates equity-aware practices related to access and language. A practice-grounded, instructor-led case study from a political science course taught in Lebanon during Spring 2025 illustrates how disclosure requirements, process-oriented assessment, and classroom dialogue made AI use visible and accountable in a resource-constrained, crisis-affected setting while also highlighting the practical limits and implementation lessons of this approach. The study concludes that Global South contexts clarify what is at stake in AI integration: safeguarding responsibility, judgment, and voice in political science writing while equipping students to use and interrogate generative tools critically under unequal conditions of access.
As GenAI systems have moved from novelty to everyday use in research and learningpractices, higher education institutions are increasingly adopting them in the realms of“literacy”, “responsible use”, and “ethical awareness”. Such framings often assume strategicsimplifications: imagining ethics as a checklist of princip...
It is argued that the most productive response to AI in the humanities begins with disciplinary redesign rather than with adoption or prohibition--and that the difficulty the humanities cultivate is not an obstacle to learning but its method.
Renuka Gusain· Arts and Humanities in Highe...· 0 citations
We articulate a critical communication pedagogy approach to the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) that addresses a tension in introductory communication courses: institutional pressures for AI policies that are easy to implement and enforce versus relational approaches that are more consonant with long-term pro...
Deanna L. Fassett, Nancy S. Park· Journal of Communication Ped...· 0 citations
It is argued that AI is not a neutral pedagogical tool but a sociotechnical infrastructure embedded in corporate power, data regimes, and the broader political economy of AI, developing a Moral-AI Pedagogy Framework embedding normative transparency, structured pluralism, critical AI literacy, and assessment reform cent...
Veteran educator Jo Renee Formicola argues that if higher education is to survive the challenge of artificial intelligence then administrators, staff, faculty, and students have little choice but to cautiously adapt by merging traditional pedagogy with innovative digital tools.
An actionable, process-oriented pedagogical framework comprising authentic assessment architecture, student-led algorithmic auditing, and a three-tiered institutional governance model designed to cultivate genuine epistemic agency in an automated landscape is articulated.
Rajiv Gurve, M. Ahmed· International Journal for Re...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.