<\/p>\n
(Bloomberg Opinion) — An artificial intelligence furor that\u2019s consuming Singapore\u2019s academic\u00a0community reveals how we\u2019ve lost the plot over the role the hyped-up technology should play in higher education. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
A student at Nanyang Technological University said in a Reddit post that she used a digital tool to alphabetize her citations for a term paper. When it was flagged for typos, she was then accused of breaking the rules over the use of generative AI for the assignment. It snowballed when two more students came forward with similar complaints, one alleging that she was penalized for using ChatGPT to help with initial research, even though she says she did not use the bot to draft the essay. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
The school, which publicly states it embraces AI for learning, initially defended its zero-tolerance stance in this case in statements to local media. But internet users rallied around the original Reddit poster, and rejoiced at an update\u00a0that she won an appeal to rid her transcript of the academic fraud label. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
It may sound like a run-of-the-mill university\u00a0dispute. But there\u2019s a reason the saga went so viral, garnering thousands of upvotes and heated opinions from online commentators. It laid bare the strange new world we\u2019ve found ourselves in, as students and faculty are rushing to keep pace with how AI should or shouldn\u2019t be used in universities. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
It’s a global conundrum, but the debate has especially roiled Asia. Stereotypes of math nerds and tiger moms aside, a rigorous focus on\u00a0tertiary studies\u00a0is often credited for the region\u2019s economic rise.\u00a0The importance of education \u2014 and long hours of studying \u2014 is instilled from the earliest age. So how does this change in the AI era? The reality is that nobody has the answer yet.\u00a0 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Despite the promises from edtech leaders that we\u2019re on the cusp of \u201cthe biggest positive transformation that education has ever seen,\u201d the data on academic outcomes hasn\u2019t kept pace with the technology\u2019s adoption. There are no long-term studies on how AI tools impact learning and cognitive functions \u2014\u00a0and viral headlines that it could make us lazy and dumb only add to the anxiety. Meanwhile, the race to not be left behind in implementing the\u00a0technology risks turning an entire generation of developing minds into guinea pigs.\u00a0 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
For educators navigating this moment, the answer is not to turn a blind eye.\u00a0Even if some teachers discourage the use of AI, it has become almost unavoidable for scholars\u00a0doing research in the internet age. Most Google searches now lead with automated summaries. Scrolling through these should not count as academic dishonesty. An informal survey of 500 Singaporean students from secondary school through university conducted by a local news outlet this year found that 84% were using products like ChatGPT for homework on a weekly basis.\u00a0 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
In China, many universities are turning to AI cheating detectors, even though the technology is imperfect. Some students are reporting on social media that they have to dumb down their writing to pass these tests or shell out cash for such detection tools themselves to ensure they beat them before submitting their papers. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
It doesn\u2019t have to be this way. The chaotic moment of transition has put new onus on educators to adapt, and shift\u00a0the focus on the learning process as much as the final results, Yeow Meng Chee, the provost and chief academic and innovation officer at the Singapore University of Technology and Design, tells me. This doesn\u2019t mean villainizing AI, but treating it as a tool, and ensuring a student understands how they arrived at their final conclusion even if they used technology. This process also helps ensure the AI outputs, which remain imperfect and prone to hallucinations (or typos), are checked\u00a0and understood. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Ultimately, professors who make the biggest difference aren\u2019t those who improve exam scores but who\u00a0build trust, teach empathy and\u00a0instill confidence\u00a0in students to solve complex problems. The most important parts of learning still can\u2019t be optimized by a machine. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
The Singapore saga shows how everyone is on edge, and whether a reference-sorting website even counts as a generative AI tool isn\u2019t clear. It also exposed another irony: Saving time on a tedious task would likely be welcomed when the student enters the workforce \u2014\u00a0if the technology hasn\u2019t already taken her entry-level job. Demand for AI literacy in the labor market is becoming a must-have, and universities ignoring it does a disservice to cohorts entering the real world. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
We\u2019re still a few years away from understanding the full impact\u00a0of AI on teaching and how it can best be used in higher education. But let\u2019s not miss the forest for the trees as we figure it out.\u00a0 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n
More From Bloomberg Opinion:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n