The rhetoric has been about training students for the economy of tomorrow. Yet when employers always, *always*, year after year, say they want their workers trained in the skills that Humanities and Social Sciences teach, somehow that never turns into more investment in those programs.

Really proud of the work we are doing at haccea.org We launched a micro course! We are unpacking our contract negotiations w as much clarity as possible after two strike days last week. We shall see what this week brings! #solidarity

cannot believe on some level I & my colleagues have turned the tide on this, but also it was in some senses inevitable as why not! Humans can do anything; we still have a way to go however of course, but: banning AI in the classroom should be as uncontroversial as banning calculators in early maths

Someone just liked this post from 2022 so I read it again to check relevance. Yeah. Shattering resonance here in 2025 on the matter of power and the "quiet quitting" discourse in orgs. open.substack.com/pub/christin...

Realizing that part of the reason universities’ uncritical pushing AI into everything bothers me is that it is partly related to how little our institutions care about the humanities. Tech that might work in (some) fields does not need to be force fed to all of us. But who listens to us?

A striking thing about articles I’ve read claiming to “study the effects” of generative AI on student writing skills and consumption of information is that (1) they nearly always find the effects are negative and (2) most “conclusions” are still written assuming that we must use AI, for some reason.

The prevalence rate of psychopathy in the general adult population is 4.5%. That’s about one out of every 22 adults. In case anyone was wondering. Psychopathy is often more concentrated among people in leadership positions.

🧪 A new position piece argues that the uncritical adoption of 'AI' in academia mirrors past collective blunders. Fueled by industry hype, they posit this trend erodes critical thinking, academic freedom, and scientific integrity. #AcademicSky #MLSky

Exactly...it is super irritating that there has been so much uncritical adoption of genAI and that governments seem to have swallowed the industry hype.

Resharing a 🧵 for the Labor Day morning crowd on why it's essential to teach young people about the labor abuses that make GenAI possible, now with excerpts from my own morning reading of Karen Hao's Empire of AI. #EduSky

The 'bubble' is definitely the wrong metaphor for this whole thing. Even if the stock values slide, the hype dissipates and the headlines vanish, there will still be a massive energy hunger locked in, along with a swathe of new fossil infrastructure projects that'll stick around for decades

If the AI takeover of education is indeed just getting started then it's really important to highlight why this could be bad, not just accept the unevidenced assumptions it will be good for education. 21 reasons to argue against AI in education coming up 🧵 www.theatlantic.com/technology/a...

"Stringer noted that real officers do not wear ski masks."

I’mma be real with y’all, I am holding this grudge big time. www.nytimes.com/2025/03/29/o...

Great thread that's still going. Join me for how it develops in progress.

Things i didn't go into education to be (presented in order of best rhetorical impact): 1) a shill for tech company marketing hype 2) a cop surveiling my students & trying to "catch" anyone who falls for the tech co. marketing hype permeating their entire sociocultural milieu So you see my dilemma

Again.

Yup. It might be a time to, idk, take your old course material off blackboard and canvas. Bc some universities are already training on it. And others will once it gets out. Students posting material to chegg and chatgpt has nothing on your employer wanting to pay less for instruction.

took a stab at a first draft of a new AI policy for my classes this year (heavily leaning on @heymrsbond.com and @williamfleitch.bsky.social)

"This ongoing bending to pressures that run counter to our deeply held educational and ethical beliefs makes me wonder if we’re experiencing a collective moral injury in higher education."

Microsoft is so not mad about "AI" becoming synonymous bad writing that they hired someone to tell you that's actually very classist of you and you should check your privilege.

Despite how it FELT, "The study found that "AI" actually decreased productivity (by 19%)." Just vibes

We have decided to ban the use of GenAI for research, writing & creative work at our organization. In fact, we make people sign an agreement saying that their research, analysis, writing, and creative work are *theirs* and not done by GenAI.

"Sabrina Rosenstock, an undergraduate film, television, & media major at the University of Michigan, has 3 main objections... the heaping energy costs involved in training & running A.I., the sheer saturation of it across her classes, & the lack of caution driving enthusiasm around the technology."

The two (excellent) books I’d recommend to anyone on this topic are Jess Calarco’s “Holding It Together,” and Allison Pugh’s “The Last Human Job.” They’re both available on audible, as well, for those of us who’ve had our attention spans shot to shit by socials & stress.

This ED news isn’t surprising. It is all the more devastating because we absolutely saw it coming. I mostly keep things on the over here but this is not a good day.

Decades of mechanistic talk about university degrees as if they were bundles of 'skills' and 'prep' are about to be proved completely wrong (obviously). Want to get a real boost? Do History or English.

Jesus Christ.

People have no idea, not really, how this budget is about to wreck their very foundations.

Teachers don't need more tech. They need smaller classes and more (paid) time for prep and instruction. But alas, the tech option means more profit for billionaires, while the latter would cost billionaires more in taxes. And so, in our current kleptocracy, tech is what teachers are going to get...

This is an important moment & this is a great acknowledgement of how exhausted everyone is with the lying & tacit acceptance of this regime's lawbreaking

THIS 👇🏻👇🏻👇🏻 Khan was a hedge fund analyst who put together some online tutoring for his niece in math and then Gates got involved. I’m not sure why higher ed believes we should listen to *anything* he has to say about education. He is not now nor has he ever been an educator.

A great piece. The best part is when David comically goes back in time, trying to pinpoint when “business has started hiring liberal arts majors” was actually a new thing Even in 1985, it wasn’t new, but you’d never know that from the constantly refreshed astonishment of the headlines

Public schools are going to be the ones to eat this. No $20k/year private middle school is gonna automate their classrooms, and no parent with money is going to send their kids to robot class. This tech is meant to make public ed cheaper (by paying fewer teachers); and private ed more lucrative.

Since the SAT essay became optional + scored by AI, I can't begin to tell you the number of people who have asked me why they should still teach writing, as if the only reason for kids to write is to score well on a standardized test. Also, this reveals how much College Board impacts practice.

May I teach the leaders first, please

Yes! Writing is thinking. Why would I want to give up thinking?

Bringing everyone back to the office or on campus might make you feel warm and fuzzy inside, but it's never going to be the solution to improving the state of higher education, to improving retention, and to improving student outcomes. It's a fallacy. Proximity is not a substitute for strategy.

yup. every bit of it. yup. www.insidehighered.com/opinion/colu...

Most of us called "AI denialists" are better described as "AI realists" because we are, in fact, brutally honest about the capacities, limitations, and social impacts of AI. We take AI as it is in the context of its deployment, and not as we wish it to be in some idealized situation.

so much for AI inevitably. i already deleted the app.

Given today's discourse on the deleterious effects of GenAI on learning, I'm resharing the final project that I designed with @sepehrvakil.bsky.social for our class AI, Equity, and Public Education. Inspired by Emily Bender and Alex Hanna, the project asks students to analyze AI hype in education.

There it is…

How should legal education respond to AI? Together with 11 UCL Laws colleagues, this paper is our vision for the sector. It's rooted in academic integrity, fundamental competences, and concerns around impacts on learning to learn and intellectual risk taking. (🧵) discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10...

These are basically NDAs for public employees in order to mute criticism of the mismanagement of the institution

Especially unconscionable in organizations that scream their diversity commitments from the rooftops but can't seem to connect the dots on the ground. Staggering.

They want to create a society of independent contractors. One where workers see each other as competition rather than comrades or even colleagues. So that workers don't come together to challenge their power. And so that workers willingly accept being exploited for their gain.

Send them on over to ENGL 101.

The AI zealots are starting to sound like the gun nuts, ignoring the general objections to the overall issue and instead dismissing critics for a lack of technical expertise.