Generative AI and the Automating of Academia

Richard Watermeyer, Lawrie Phipps, Donna Lanclos, Cathryn Knight
{"title":"Generative AI and the Automating of Academia","authors":"Richard Watermeyer, Lawrie Phipps, Donna Lanclos, Cathryn Knight","doi":"10.1007/s42438-023-00440-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The neoliberal transformation of higher education in the UK and an intertwined focus on the productive efficiency and prestige value of universities has led to an epidemic of overwork and precarity among academics. Many are found to be struggling with lofty performance expectations and an insistence that all dimensions of their work consistently achieve positional gains despite ferocious competition and the omnipresent threat of failure. Working under the current audit culture present across education, academics are thus found to overwork or commit to accelerated labour as pre-emptive compensation for the habitual inclemency of peer-review and vagaries of student evaluation, in accommodating the copiousness of ‘invisible’ tasks, and in eluding the myriad crevasses of their precarious labour. The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools and more specifically, large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, offers potential relief for academics and a means to offset intensive demands and discover more of a work-based equilibrium. Through a recent survey of n = 284 UK academics and their use of GAI, we discover, however, that the digitalisation of higher education through GAI tools no more alleviates than extends the dysfunctions of neoliberal logic and deepens academia’s malaise. Notwithstanding, we argue that the proliferating use of GAI tools by academics may be harnessed as a source of positive disruption to the industrialisation of their labour and catalyst of (re)engagement with scholarly craftsmanship.","PeriodicalId":489236,"journal":{"name":"Postdigital Science and Education","volume":"11 11","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postdigital Science and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-023-00440-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The neoliberal transformation of higher education in the UK and an intertwined focus on the productive efficiency and prestige value of universities has led to an epidemic of overwork and precarity among academics. Many are found to be struggling with lofty performance expectations and an insistence that all dimensions of their work consistently achieve positional gains despite ferocious competition and the omnipresent threat of failure. Working under the current audit culture present across education, academics are thus found to overwork or commit to accelerated labour as pre-emptive compensation for the habitual inclemency of peer-review and vagaries of student evaluation, in accommodating the copiousness of ‘invisible’ tasks, and in eluding the myriad crevasses of their precarious labour. The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools and more specifically, large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, offers potential relief for academics and a means to offset intensive demands and discover more of a work-based equilibrium. Through a recent survey of n = 284 UK academics and their use of GAI, we discover, however, that the digitalisation of higher education through GAI tools no more alleviates than extends the dysfunctions of neoliberal logic and deepens academia’s malaise. Notwithstanding, we argue that the proliferating use of GAI tools by academics may be harnessed as a source of positive disruption to the industrialisation of their labour and catalyst of (re)engagement with scholarly craftsmanship.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生成式人工智能与学术界自动化
英国高等教育的新自由主义转型,以及对大学生产效率和声誉价值的关注交织在一起,导致了学术界过度工作和不稳定的流行。人们发现,许多人都在与过高的业绩期望作斗争,并坚持认为,尽管竞争激烈,失败的威胁无处不在,但他们的工作的各个方面都能持续实现地位提升。在目前整个教育领域的审计文化下工作,学者们因此被发现过度工作或承诺加速劳动,以先发制人地补偿同行评议的习惯性严酷和学生评估的变幻莫测,以适应大量的“无形”任务,并逃避他们不稳定劳动的无数缝隙。生成式人工智能(GAI)工具的扩散,更具体地说,像ChatGPT这样的大型语言模型(llm),为学术界提供了潜在的缓解,也为抵消密集需求和发现更多基于工作的平衡提供了一种手段。然而,通过最近对n = 284名英国学者及其对GAI的使用进行的一项调查,我们发现,通过GAI工具实现高等教育的数字化不仅没有缓解新自由主义逻辑的功能失调,而且还扩大了新自由主义逻辑的功能失调,加深了学术界的萎靡。尽管如此,我们认为,学者对GAI工具的大量使用可能会对他们的劳动工业化产生积极的破坏,并促进(重新)参与学术工艺。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Review of Dave Cormier (2024). Learning in a Time of Abundance: The Community Is the Curriculum How AI Works: Reconfiguring Lifelong Learning Review of Tiziana Terranova (2022). After the Internet: Digital Networks between Capital and the Common Flatulence, Wonder, and Artificial Intelligence: Montaigne and Emerging Technologies An Alternative Approach to Science and Technology Parks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1