Teaching in the age of AI

Universities and teachers around the world are being forced to rethink their approach to teaching given the rapid advancement of AI. Most homework and assignments can be done by AI far better than even the instructors of the courses. AI-detection tools are not the answer since they will always be gamed, and moreover, preventing people from using AI isn't really training them for the real world because AI is here to stay. We have AI on our phones as pocket companions. Google searches have been replaced with AI answers to queries. 

Viva voce to test students instead of take-home assignments, handwritten term papers in class, etc. have all been suggested, and I've tried them myself. However, these are interventions at the point of the test and not something that really encourages students to value learning. AI-driven grade inflation does not imply better learning; in fact, the opposite is most likely true. 

I happened to come across this short but interesting piece on Medium on how personalized (and not standardized) teaching, as in the days of the gurukul, may be part of the answer to this quandary about what AI has done to education. How can one personalize the learning experience in a modern classroom? A partial answer can be found in "Ungrading", inspired by the wisdom of Yael Niv (Princeton) that she was generous enough to share! I'm copying this over from a LinkedIn post I made before starting the experiment.

🔁 The goal? Shift the focus from grades ➡️ growth, and create a space for intrinsic, reflective, and collaborative learning.

Here’s how it works:
✅ Students define their own learning goals, aligned with course outcomes
🧠 They set S.M.A.R.T. goals in consultation with me
📊 Progress is tracked in measurable, verifiable ways
🔄 Goals can evolve as understanding deepens
💬 Regular feedback loops support growth
📝 Monthly self-reflections encourage metacognition
🎥 Some flipped classes: students submit questions/comments ahead of time, and we use those to guide class discussions
🤝 Peer review & collaboration are encouraged and integrated into assessments
🏁 At the end of the course, students propose their own final grade, supported by data & clear criteria outlined in the syllabus

You can read about the results on LinkedIn, the post also has screenshots of student feedback. The class was small, yes, but uniformly, everyone reported having put in significantly more effort than a class that uses standard grading schemes. They were given ownership of their learning AND evaluation with evidence. There were at least monthly individual meetings with me, but we also had hands-on practical sessions every week where I got the chance to understand each person's strengths and weaknesses (which they themselves identified and noted down in a shared Google doc with me at the beginning of the semester, so their learning objectives were self-defined). I also kept track of their weekly activities towards the course that they documented (with links to evidence, such as highlights and notes in their version of the textbook, again shared as a Google Drive link) in the same shared Google doc. Btw, I had even asked them to pick a personal goal, such as exercise, diet, and sleep, to also work on as part of this experiment. After all, learning cannot happen if people are not taking care of their bodies and minds. People were not graded against each other but against their own starting points. Everyone was allowed to use AI for their projects, but they had to be able to explain all the analyses properly during the two presentations in class. They got feedback each time about what I perceived to be the degree to which they understood the concepts and where the gaps were. The only intervention I had to do at the end during grading was to bump UP the grade for some people who were too harsh on themselves. 

Now, how do we do this with larger classes? Well, this is the wrong question. Every university administrator wants faculty to cater to larger and larger classes. Small classes (< 10 in size) are deemed unworthy of even giving faculty credit for teaching! It seems like giving students a stellar learning experience is not worth much. If one were more thoughtful, I think the question should be how we can break up larger classes into small ones where students get quality facetime and individual attention from instructors. In fact, even some IITs have deliberately tried to make smaller classes, especially for UG first-year students, due to stress and other mental health issues. 

I urge deans of academics and directors of educational institutions in India to consider a serious overhaul of what we think of as creditable teaching. Is the solution really larger and larger classes with standardized assessments which reek of education as a transaction? Shall we humanize education as it once used to be? It won't be easy but we are all well trained and creative people. With some time and effort, we can rethink education and how to incentivize both faculty and students to get away from the transactional nature of our classrooms today. If the challenges introduced by AI will finally force us to rethink education and humanize it, perhaps that would be the biggest contribution of AI.