How Do We Define Quality Student Work in an Age of AI?

As I mentioned here a couple of weeks ago, I've been reading Teaching with AI: A Practical Guide to a New Era of Human Learning by José Antonio Bowen and C. Edward Watson. It's a remarkably comprehensive book on the subject given how quickly it was written and published! Bowen and Watson are fairly non-directive in most of the book, laying out the issues and questions higher education must face regarding generative AI and its impact on teaching and learning, generally without saying that instructors must to this or that in response.

That non-directive approach shifts, however, in their chapter on AI and grading. They argue that any kind of student work that is of the same quality as that produced by AI should, henceforth, not receive passing grades, and that it is incumbent on instructors to ask themselves when grading, "In what ways has the student moved above and beyond what AI produced for them?" That's a rather bold recommendation for recalibrating how we define quality student work in this new age of AI!

Over on my Agile Learning blog, I wrote about this chapter of Teaching with AI and offered a few thoughts in response to Bowen and Watson's advice. See my post "How Do We Define Quality Student Work in an Age of AI?"

When I shared that blog post on LinkedIn, José Bowen offered a little more context in the comments:

What do you think about the paradox that Bowen notes? How should we go about developing expertise in our students when novice-level work can be handled by a robot and might not be valued in the job market?

The Grading Conference

Speaking of grading, I want to put in a plug for the Grading Conference, an online conference "where faculty join together to learn about grading practices that best support student learning, promote diversity, equity and inclusion in the classroom, and enhance student and faculty classroom experiences." Now in its fifth year, the conference will be held June 13-15 this summer, with registration open until June 10. Registration is just $50 or pay what you can for those with limited institutional support.

My CETL colleague Emily Donahoe is on the organizing committee this year (you've read her blog, Unmaking the Grade, right?), and she's very excited about the program that's been planned. Keynotes will be given by Laila McCloud, Jeffrey Schinske, and Susan D. Blum. Concurrent sessions are on a variety of themes, including student perspectives, strategies and practices, education research, disciplinary applications, and more. And if you can't make the conference itself, they have compiled a wealth of resources on alternative grading.

If you've been interested in alternatives to traditional grading practices, I think you'll find plenty of inspiration and ideas at the Grading Conference.

The Present Professor

And while I'm plugging my CETL colleagues' work, I have to mention The Present Professor: Authenticity and Transformational Teachingby Elizabeth (Liz) Norell, which is now available for pre-order. Even if it didn't have such a stunning cover, I would still be excited to read this book!

Here's a bit from the description:

The Present Professor will be published in December 2024 by the University of Oklahoma Press as part of the new "Teaching, Engaging, and Thriving in Higher Ed" series edited by James M. Lang and Michelle D. Miller. I am on the advisory board for the series, and I'm excited to see the release of The Present Professor and the other books coming in the series.

Thanks for reading!

If you found this newsletter useful, please forward it to a colleague who might like it! That's one of the best ways you can support the work I'm doing here at Intentional Teaching.

Or consider supporting Intentional Teaching through Patreon. For just $3 US per month, you can help defray production costs for the podcast and newsletter and you get access to Patreon-only interviews and bonus clips.