AI: Arguing its Place in Higher Education

JonathanDempseyisahighereducationmanagerintheUKwithnearly20yearsofexperience across a variety of business areas from ITsupport to housing, student well-being to student data. His passions lie in the support of student success which is borne out not only in his professional work but also in his academic for which he is currently undertaking a professional doctorate in Higher Education Management at the University of Bath. As well as supporting students Jonathan also supports the development of his fellow professionals through his position as a trustee with the Association of University Administrators (AUA), the representative voice of HE professionals in the UK.

The integration of AI into higher education is a topic that is being met with both excitement and apprehension. While it is clear that these technologies have the potential to bring significant advancements to the sector, there are also concerns that must be addressed. Some of these concerns include:

● The potential for reduced critical thinking and problem-solving skills among students who rely too heavily on AI assistance.

AI is coming and arguably, in the form of ChatGPT, it’s already here. So, trying to put the genie back in the bottle seems like a futile if not impossible task

● The risk of decreased engagement and motivation in learning when using AI.

● The need for proper training and education on the limitations and ethical considerations of AI for students.

While these concerns are valid, it is important to also consider the potential benefits of using AI in higher education. The arguments for and against the use of AI in the sector are ongoing and will be continued to be debated argument, ChatGPT. So, can ChatGPT convince me and you that it shouldn’t have a place in higher education or can the fact it can argue that case shows its potential worth for the sector and further.

Let’s find out!

In favor of the use of AI in HE

AI is coming and arguably, in the form of ChatGPT, it’s already here. So, trying to put the genie back in the bottle seems like a futile if not impossible task. If it is now out there then we need to begin understanding it and consider how it can, within the higher ed context, be best used to support our students.

In considering how it can be best used we should probably consider one of the biggest concerns of a tool like ChatGPT, cheating. There are already plenty of articles with worries that students will be able to ask ChatGPT to write their assignment for them by just giving them the question and a few additional prompts.

It has already been seen that it can produce essays of a decent standard worthy of more than pass marks and possibly more concerning different every time someone asks if it potentially thwarts plagiarism detection systems that are commonplace in most VLEs.

To continue the debate, I will put forward my arguments for the place of AI in higher education. In respect of balance, this article will put forward the argument against the use of AI in higher education.

To make it a little more interesting, and as an experiment, I will invite the current biggest name in the AI space to put forward this opposing

However, one of the counterarguments could be that for many years people have said that with the massification of higher education, we are just producing graduates who can regurgitate information without growing their criticality. ChatGPT just speeds his process up and gets the job done. When these graduates go into the workplace for the first few years this may be just what their employers want. Someone who can pump out information in a standard way without thinking more widely or critically about the subject.

Why wouldn’t you use it to do this task?

If we do want to create critically-minded graduates then ChatGPT should not be feared but seen as a call to action for educators and institutions. This could be the catalyst to rethink how we assess students, and no this is not a call for more exams where you remove the risk of AI, but reconsidering how you get students to show their understanding. This could be through vlogs, presentations, or artistic representations. Who knows what else but it would be interesting to start finding out what it could be.

Educators could also help students understand how such a tool could help them in their assessments. So rather than them going to ChatGPT for a direct answer to their assessment question it could be looking at how they could prompt it for feedback on their ideas, for example, “what do you think of my answer so far? Am I being clear enough about topic x?”.

This could be the critical friend they need for their essays when they need it at 3 am in the morning and not at office hours in a week’s time, 24 hours before the deadline.

This support can also extend to students in a variety of other ways. Maybe the student is the first in their family to go to university and traversing all the policies and support is just too daunting or a completely foreign language to them. So, for example, a student could ask ChatGPT “I’m not well and my uni assignment is due tomorrow. I won’t complete it what should I do?”

And here is an answer from ChatGPT, “It’s important to prioritize your health. If you’re not feeling well, it’s best to rest and take care of yourself. You should contact your professor or academic advisor as soon as possible to explain your situation and ask for an extension or alternative arrangements. They may be able to offer you an extension on your assignment or make an alternative. It’s also a good idea to let your classmates know if you won’t be able to attend any group meetings or work on group projects.”

This is a well-thought-out answer that guides the student to where they could seek support but also let them know of their own responsibilities with their peers. This answer took a few seconds to be generated. A heck of a lot quicker trying to navigate an institution’s website especially if you don’t know the correct terminology.

If it can help to remove barriers for students and allow them to ask questions they are not certain of or too nervous or ashamed to ask then it could become a great leveller within higher education.

Now I am not ignoring the potential risks, however, if we ignore the tool then the risks will still occur albeit potentially amplified and under the radar but rather than going through them, I will let ChatGPT state its counter-arguments and the risks of AI and itself within higher education.

Against the use of AI in HE

ChatGPT was asked to write an opposing viewpoint to the above, here is its response:

An opposing viewpoint to the idea that AI like ChatGPT should be embraced in higher education is that it could ultimately harm the integrity of the education system and devalue degrees. While it may seem convenient to use AI to help support students, the potential for cheating and the lack of critical thinking skills developed by relying on AI outweigh the benefits. Additionally, using AI for support could also perpetuate educational inequalities, as those who have access to these tools may have an unfair advantage over those who do not.

It is important to remember that the purpose of higher education is to promote critical thinking and the ability to analyze and evaluate information. By allowing students to use AI to write their assignments, we risk creating a generation of graduates who lack the ability to think critically and independently. This will not only affect the quality of graduates, but also the reputation of the higher education system.

Moreover, the potential for cheating is a major concern. AI-generated essays may be able to bypass plagiarism detection software, and educators may struggle to distinguish between an AI-generated essay and one written by a student. This could lead to widespread cheating and a further devaluation of degrees.

Furthermore, using AI for support could also perpetuate educational inequalities, as those who have access to these tools may have an unfair advantage over those who do not. This could lead to an even greater divide between students from different socioeconomic backgrounds.

Conclusion

while the use of AI in higher education may seem like a solution for support, the potential for cheating and lack of critical thinking skills developed outweigh the benefits. It is important to focus on developing new methods of assessment that encourage students to engage with the material in a deeper and more meaningful way.

The use of AI like ChatGPT in higher education is a complex issue with valid arguments on both sides, even when the other side is provided by the tool itself.

On one hand, it can provide efficient support for students, especially in navigating university policies and procedures and removing barriers for students who may not have access to support otherwise.

However, it also raises concerns about the integrity of the education system and the devaluation of degrees. AI-generated essays may be able to bypass plagiarism detection software, and it could also stifle creativity and critical thinking, which are important skills for success in the real world.

Overall, while the use of AI in higher education has great potential it will always be important to carefully consider the potential consequences. The mere fact it can argue for its non-inclusion is almost an argument for it to be here. Either way tools like this are here to stay and so we need to be ready for them.

Industry Perspective

Ready and Willing? Higher Education’s (Increasing) Challenges to Recruit Individuals as the Next Department Chair

Jeffrey Harris, Managing Partner, Harris Search Associates

For over 25 years, our executive search and management consulting firm has been entrusted by the foremost global higher education institutions to recruit its senior most leadership talent. Increasingly, we are engaged following the unexpected departure of an important institutional leader, the establishment of a new department or center, where timely completion of an assignment is imperative, or where an internal search committee has tried, but not succeeded, to recruit on its own. In every assignment, we are charged with facilitating a process that ensures a robust, diverse, pool of candidates and the selection of an outstanding new leader aligned with the institution’s values and strategic priorities. Curiously, over the last several years, Department Chair searches have become the fastest-growing aspect of our executive search practice. It has become such a common occurrence, that clients who have traditionally retained our firm for Decanal, Provost, Vice President, and Presidential level searches, are now frequently engaging us successfully recruit Department Chairs.

Jeffrey Harris is the founder and Managing Partner of Harris Search Associates where he leads the firm’s HigherEducation,AcademicMedicine, and Healthcare Administration practices.Foundedin1997andmodeled after the first premier managementconsulting firms, Harris Search Associates is a leading global executive search and boardadvisoryconsulting firmfocusedsolely on the recruitment of senior leadership talent to support the growth of the foremost universities, academic medical centers, medical schools, research institutions, and healthcare enterprises driving global innovation and discovery. Based in Columbus,Ohio,andwithregionaloffices in San Francisco and Dallas, the firm has successfully completed over 900 assignments. Jeffrey leads a diverse, seasoned team of over 20 seasoned consultants and staff who combine the recruiting and leadership assessment expertise from the largest, most well-recognized retained search organizations with highly respected, former university Presidents, Provosts, Deans, Vice Presidents, and senior administrators from across the country.

This led us to ask clients what it is about the current challenges of identifying and persuading individuals to serve in the role of department chair that now more than ever prompts the use of an external search partner. Their answers spoke volumes.

The job of Department Chair is an important one and so is selecting the right one

Why do so many Department Chair searches on campus continue to fail? There are likely several factors, but principally among them may be that the rewards for chairing a department are often seen as minimal. Moreover, faculty members rarely receive formal preparation to prepare them to successfully assume the role. And in some instances, a reluctance to assume the role may be due to a perceived lack of definition around authority, expectations, accountability, and institutional support. By contrast, remaining as a professor, recognized scholar-researcher, and having opportunities to serve on the editorial boards of prestigious academic journals along with professional satisfaction, enduring relationships, and recognition from peers may be viewed as more personally appealing. Despite apprehensions by many faculty to assume the role, the contribution and impact of the Department Chair remain a truly important one. A Department Chair serves as the front-line leader and bridge between faculty and senior administration, considered as the middle manager charged with assigning teach loads, managing promotion and tenure decisions, mentoring faculty and staff, interfacing with students, tending to budgets, and hiring faculty and staff.

The significance of the chair can also extend beyond the department, as many chairs make up the future pools of decanal and provost candidates. The experience gained by a department chair is often indicative of how an emerging leader will serve in a deanship where communication and persuasion are premium skills, and most provosts will have served as a chair. Given the increasing lack of appeal to serve as chair by many faculty members, enticing individuals to assume the role will likely require rewards throughout and at the end of the term of service.

In many instances, the selection of a chair, as suggested above, may involve a process of persuading a current member of the department to serve a term (or more) as chair. Tales of drawing straws with the loser agreeing reluctantly to serve are not uncommon. Examples abound of a department chair position remaining unfilled or someone serving as an acting or interim chair without foreseeable end has become an alarming trend, especially in instances where no one else is willing to take on the job. In these cases, outside assistance may not be required.

Another sign of the significance of the role of the department chair may be seen in instances when a university chooses to seek a chair from outside the institution rather than from within. Such a choice may reflect the resistance or absence of tenured faculty members to fill the chairmanship who can bridge divisions within a department or provide a departure point from the directions the department had pursued previously.

But as the role of department chair has grown, and in many instances, the reputation of a college or university is a function of the strength of departments, so has the awareness that external help is often required to recruit a chair. However, beyond those academic matters are questions about how candidates for the chairmanship view the job and are likely to carry it out. And then there are the cases where a dean and a provost determine that no one in each department is ready to assume a chairmanship or the department needs new insight and leadership and must a chair from outside the institution. In those cases, a search firm may be of assistance.

Making the case for assistance in the recruitment of Department Chairs and suggestions for future searches

A Department Chair search, whether assisted by a search firm or not, provides a transformative opportunity for the campus. Indeed, there is no recipe that ensures a successful outcome; the process remains more art than science. However, careful organization and institutional support can increase the likelihood of identifying the most highly sought-after candidates to assume the role. Increasingly, it is commonplace to invest in an experienced executive search partner with the requisite expertise, history of similar completed assignments, and professional networks, as well as commitment to the attraction of a robust diverse, the pool of candidates to ensure successful outcomes for the search.

Regardless of approach (with or without the assistance of an executive search partner), at a minimum, efforts should begin with multiple stakeholder interviews. The information gained from stakeholders will serve as a key asset for potential candidate engagement and discussion. Clarity around the preferred candidate qualifications, including academic credentials,

Once the search has been completed, to ensure the greatest likelihood of a successful future tenure, campus administration should commit to a thoughtful transition, onboarding, and development plan to support the new Chair national/international research prominence, and appropriate leadership experience, as well as short-and near-term expectations, should then be distilled into a compelling leadership profile for the position to share with prospective candidates. This should then be followed by a deliberate and concentrated recruitment effort to engage a cohort of internationally esteemed academic leaders who may be convinced to confidentially entertain a compelling alternative opportunity. Finally, once the search has been completed, to ensure the greatest likelihood of a successful future tenure, campus administration should commit to a thoughtful transition, onboarding, and development plan to support the new Chair. The job of the Department Chair is an important one and so is selecting the right one. Happy hunting!