It drives me crazy when edtech companies or our own administrators argue that using GenAI for grading or giving students feedback will free up time for faculty to spend on work that actually matters. That's bullshit. The REAL work that matters is reading students' work and giving them genuine feedback. I fully agree with you that we need to show students that we read their work and give them our time for genuine feedback. This is painstaking work, but it's the most important "teaching" work we can offer students!
I agree with a lot of this. The one piece not mentioned is grading. When students see the worth of their work encapsulated in a single letter (with a plus or a minus) it can undermine a lot of the good done through all the feedback given. I don't know if the answer is less graded work, a de-emphasis on final products, more authentic assessments with real audiences, or other more creative methods, but it's a central issue. I'm also unclear if the author is speaking from the perspective primarily as an English teacher, but much of the way in which students may be using AI is for content questions in course-specific domains. I'm afraid that those "HW" type questions often asked in HS may be a thing of the past. But thoughtful post! Thanks, John.
"Show students we actually read the papers. And design assignments with that in mind"
AMEN
It drives me crazy when edtech companies or our own administrators argue that using GenAI for grading or giving students feedback will free up time for faculty to spend on work that actually matters. That's bullshit. The REAL work that matters is reading students' work and giving them genuine feedback. I fully agree with you that we need to show students that we read their work and give them our time for genuine feedback. This is painstaking work, but it's the most important "teaching" work we can offer students!
I agree with a lot of this. The one piece not mentioned is grading. When students see the worth of their work encapsulated in a single letter (with a plus or a minus) it can undermine a lot of the good done through all the feedback given. I don't know if the answer is less graded work, a de-emphasis on final products, more authentic assessments with real audiences, or other more creative methods, but it's a central issue. I'm also unclear if the author is speaking from the perspective primarily as an English teacher, but much of the way in which students may be using AI is for content questions in course-specific domains. I'm afraid that those "HW" type questions often asked in HS may be a thing of the past. But thoughtful post! Thanks, John.