Students at Staffordshire University expressed feeling “deprived of knowledge and enjoyment” upon realizing that the course they intended to pursue for their digital careers was primarily delivered through AI.
James and Owen were part of 41 students who enrolled in a coding module last year at Staffordshire, looking to make a government-supported career transition. apprentice A program aimed at preparing individuals to become cybersecurity experts or software engineers.
However, as AI-generated slides were intermittently narrated by an AI voiceover, James began to lose confidence in the program and its administrators, fearing he had “wasted two years” of his life on a course designed “in the most cost-effective manner.”
“If I were to submit something created by an AI, I’d be expelled from the university, yet we are being instructed by an AI,” James remarked during a confrontation with an instructor recorded as part of a course in October 2024.
James and his peers have engaged in several discussions with university officials regarding the use of AI in their coursework. Nonetheless, the university seems to persist in utilizing AI-generated materials for instruction. This year, it posted a policy statement on its course website rationalizing the use of AI, detailing a “Framework for Academic Professionals to Leverage AI Automation” in their academic activities and teaching.
The university’s foreign policy states that students who outsource assignments to AI or present AI-generated work as their own are breaching the integrity policy and could face academic misconduct charges.
“I’m in the midst of my life and career,” James lamented. “I don’t feel I can just leave and start over now. I feel trapped on this path.”
The situation at Staffordshire resembles this more and more. Universities are integrating AI tools to assist students, develop course materials, and provide tailored feedback. A Ministry of Education policy document released in August welcomed this trend, asserting that generative AI “has the potential to revolutionize education.” A survey conducted last year by education technology firm Jisc among 3,287 higher education faculty revealed that almost a quarter use AI tools in their teaching.
For students, AI education seems to be more demoralizing than transformative. In the US, students have voiced their discontent online in reviews about professors using AI. In the UK, undergraduates turned to Reddit to express frustration over instructors copying and pasting feedback generated by AI. Chat GPT or using AI-generated content in coursework images.
“I recognize there’s pressure compelling instructors to use AI, but I’m just disappointed,” commented one student. I wrote.
James and Owen realized “almost immediately” that AI was being utilized in their Staffordshire course last year, notably during their first class when the instructor presented a PowerPoint with an AI audio reading the slides.
Shortly thereafter, they began to notice indications that some course materials were AI-generated, including inconsistent editing of American and British English, suspicious file names, and “general, surface-level information” that sometimes cryptically referenced U.S. law.
Signs of AI-generated content persisted this year. In one course video uploaded online, the narration introducing the material shifted to a Spanish accent for approximately 30 seconds before reverting to a British accent.
Narration accent changes during lesson in allegedly AI-generated course – video
The Guardian examined the course materials at Staffordshire and utilized two distinct AI detectors (Winston AI and Originality AI) to assess this year’s content. Both indicated that numerous assignments and presentations were “highly likely to have been generated by AI.”
Ms. James reported her concerns during a monthly meeting with student representatives early in the course. Later, in late November, it was discussed in a lecture and incorporated into the instructional materials. In the recording, he requests the instructor refrain from worrying about the slides.
“Everyone knows these slides were generated by AI. We would prefer if they were discarded,” he stated. “I don’t want guidance from GPT.”
Shortly after, the student representative for the course responded, “We conveyed this feedback, James, and the reply was that instructors can use diverse tools. This answer was quite frustrating.”
Another student commented: “While there are some helpful points in the presentation, only 5% of it is useful. There’s valuable content buried here, but perhaps we can extract that value ourselves by consulting ChatGPT.”
The lecturer laughed awkwardly, saying, “I appreciate the honesty…” before shifting to discuss another tutorial he had created using ChatGPT. “Honestly, I did this on very short notice,” he added.
Ultimately, the course director informed James that he would not receive an AI experience in the final session, as the material would be evaluated by two human instructors.
In response to inquiries from the Guardian, Staffordshire University asserted that “academic standards and learning objectives were upheld” for the course.
“Staffordshire University endorses the responsible and ethical application of digital technologies in accordance with our guidelines. While AI tools may aid certain aspects of preparation, they cannot replace academic expertise and must always be utilized in a manner that preserves academic integrity and discipline standards.”
Although the university appointed a non-AI lecturer for the final lecture of the course, James and Owen indicated that it felt insufficient at this point, especially since the university seemingly continued to use AI in this year’s instructional materials.
“I feel as if a part of my life has been taken from me,” James stated.
Owen, who is in the midst of a career transition, explained that he opted for the course to gain foundational knowledge rather than merely a qualification, but he now believes it was a waste of time.
“It’s exceedingly frustrating to sit through material that lacks value when I could be dedicating my time to something genuinely worthwhile,” he remarked.
Source: www.theguardian.com
