Latest news with #universities
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Science
- The Guardian
Scientific publishing needs urgent reform to retain trust in research process
The dysfunctions of scientific publishing that your article so aptly captured derive from two forces (Quality of scientific papers questioned as academics 'overwhelmed' by the millions published, 13 July) – researchers are incentivised to publish as much as possible and publishers make more money if they publish more papers. Artificial intelligence will not fix this. Churning out more papers faster has got us to this place. Given current incentives, AI will mean churning them out even faster. A paper written by AI, peer-reviewed by AI and read only by AI creates a self-reinforcing loop that holds no real value, erodes trust in science and voids scientific inquiry of meaning. Research is driven by our wonder at the world. That needs to be central to any reform of scientific publishing. Instead, the driving forces can be addressed by two measures. Incentives for researchers can and should prioritise quality over quantity, and meaning over metrics. And publishers' extortionate fees (fuelling profits of more than 30%) can and should be refused by those who pay them. Both the incentives and publishers' contracts are governed by the funders of research – universities, research councils and foundations. Their welcome attempts to engage with these problems through Plan S, which aims to make research publications open access, have not succeeded because these have been captured by publishers that twisted them to their advantage, making yet more profits. There are examples, often beyond the global north, of scientific publishing that is not geared towards generating profits for publishers. SciELO (which is centred on Latin America) is one, and the Global Diamond Open Access Alliance champions many others. We have much to learn from them. Research is in a parlous state in the English-speaking world – at risk for the truths it tells in the US, and for its expense in Britain. Funders have the power radically to alter the incentives scientists face and to lower the rents extracted by BrockingtonIcrea (Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies)Paolo CrosettoGrenoble Applied Economics LaboratoryPablo Gomez BarreiroScience services and laboratories, Kew Gardens Your article on the overwhelming volume of scientific papers rightly highlights a system under pressure. But the deeper dysfunction lies not only in quantity, but in the economics of scholarly publishing, where publishers cash in on researchers' dependence on journals for academic careers. The academic publishing market systematically diverts public research funds into shareholder profits. Open access was meant to democratise knowledge, but its original vision has been co-opted by commercial publishers. It was BioMed Central (now Springer-Nature) that first introduced the 'author pays' model to secure revenue streams. With article processing charges (APCs) now being the dominant open-access model, authors routinely pay between £2,000 and £10,000 to publish a single article, even if the cost of producing it does not exceed £1,000. Some of us attended the recent Royal Society conference on the future of scientific publishing, where its vice-president, Sir Mark Walport, reminded the audience that academic publishing isn't free and that if we want to remove paywalls for both authors and readers, someone must pay the bills. We argue that there is already enough money in the system, which allows leading publishers such as Elsevier to generate profit margins of 38%. Our most recent estimates show that researchers paid close to $9bn in APCs to six publishers in 2019-23, with annual amounts nearly tripling in these five years. These most recent estimates far exceed the $1bn estimated for 2015-18 that your article cites. As further emphasised at the Royal Society meeting, publishers monetise the current role that journal prestige plays in hiring, promotion and funding. Therefore, in order to make open access sustainable and to put a stop to these extractive business practices, it is essential to reform academic assessment and decouple it from knowledge HausteinAssociate Professor, School of Information Studies, University of Ottawa; Co-director, Scholarly Communications LabEric ScharesEngineering and collection analysis librarian, University Library, Iowa State UniversityLeigh-Ann ButlerScholarly communication librarian, University of OttawaJuan Pablo Alperin Associate professor, School of Publishing, Simon Fraser University; Scientific director, Public Knowledge Project Academic publishing is creaking at the seams. Too many articles are published and too many journals don't add real value. Researchers are incentivised to publish quantity over quality, and some journal publishers benefit from this. This detracts from the excellent, world-changing and increasingly open-access research that we all need to flourish – and that quality publishers cultivate. Generative AI only scales up these pressures, as your article shows. Something has to change. That's why Cambridge University Press has spent the last few months collaborating with researchers, librarians, publishers, funders and learned societies across the globe on a radical and pragmatic review of the open research publishing ecosystem, which we will publish in the autumn. Focusing on generative AI or on low-quality journals alone is insufficient. We need a system-wide approach that reviews and rethinks the link between publishing, reward and recognition; equity in research dissemination; research integrity; and one that takes technological change seriously. The system is about to break. We need creative thinking and commitment from all players to fix it and to build something HillManaging director, Cambridge University Press
Fast Company
3 days ago
- Science
- Fast Company
AI tools are killing students' critical thinking. It's time to fight back
The data, both empirical and intuitive, could not be more clear: Generic, direct-answer and productivity AI platforms, most notably OpenAI's ChatGPT, are dumbing down an entire generation of students, eroding critical thinking skills, and atrophying the muscle that is such a core component of what makes us human. And yet, universities and K-12 institutions are agreeing to substantial deals and partnerships with generic AI platforms, such as ChatGPT EDU, to bring these destructive tools into their classrooms, encouraging their use among the student body even as the correlation between usage of current AI tools and critical thinking shows devastating negative effects. Reading competencies are down for the fourth straight year and 50% of students admit to using ChatGPT for a quiz, test or essay. We've all had some version of the same conversation about COVID's effects on students. Many lost an entire year or more and were just passed through to the next grade level. It was a disastrous effect for students who were already behind the curve. In effect, direct answer generation AI tools are creating a 'COVID 2.0'' generation of students who won't lose just one year but a significant portion of their educational experience. Their development and personal agency is diminishing every day by using AI as a tool for shortcuts and cheating. It's Worse than you Think There's a reason we don't allow children to drive a car before a certain age. There's a level of responsibility society has determined is necessary to drive a powerful machine. AI is a powerful machine but we're handing our children the keys to a Mustang GPT with no training and no protections. Predictably, it's not going well. You may be wondering why a founder of an edtech AI platform is critical of AI in education. To be clear, I know that AI can have an immensely positive impact on education. I know that AI can act as a force-multiplier for teachers and it can open up a world of knowledge and inspiration for every student, everywhere. AI can do all of these things but not the way we're currently using it. Not with generic AI platforms like ChatGPT that simply give students the answers. AI makes things substantially easier, and that's amazing. I use AI, including ChatGPT, consistently every day and it makes me and my team 10x more productive. I've seen some amazing things, like a 6-year-old building a functioning app using AI, and so many others releasing a massive amount of creativity. But we cannot teach children that life is as easy as sticking in a prompt and waiting for an output, there will always be hard problems that require critical thinking and a lack of tools. As a recent student, I have seen the outsized role this technology plays in our day-to-day lives, the immense ramifications of irresponsible integration, and that the situation is far worse than even the media is portraying it right now. Let me repeat that: the situation is far worse than even the media is portraying it right now. Seemingly every headline regarding AI in education highlights the devastating impacts and, for maybe the first time in history, the media is actually downplaying the ramifications. A friend and recent graduate told me that he hasn't typed an assignment in two years; he's simply copied and pasted from ChatGPT every single time. He just graduated from a top-tier university and is wholly unprepared for the workforce. Have an issue? Oh ill just ChatGPT it, no how, no why. This is the norm now, it's not an outlier. As 96% of teachers acknowledge AI is the future of education, change must be made today or this and subsequent generations of students will continue to see their critical thinking, literacy, attention spans, and ability to contribute to the workforce severely degraded. This change must begin with an acknowledgement by the wider educational and technology communities: generic productivity AI platforms, like ChatGPT, are not a solution to integrating AI into classrooms. There is Hope, if We Act. Right. Now. Every school needs to make a simple declaration today: they will not use platforms that do not focus on ethical and responsible use of AI for studying and learning. This means tools like ChatGPT, which allow for direct answer generation, have no place in our educational system. The promotion of purpose-built AI learning platforms that don't give students the answer will provide schools and teachers, regardless of their bandwidth, with a foundation to take confident steps forward and create a better future for students. Tech Leaders and Educators Must Work Together to Establish Guidelines The education establishment is in a tough spot right now. They know they need to implement AI solutions into their classrooms to prepare students for the workforce of the future, but the leadership often doesn't see alternatives to generic tools like ChatGPT. Universities are eager to remain competitive and educators on every level want to give their students the best chance to succeed in the AI world. We have to start with a set of core principals that we all agree is in the best interests of our students and in the best interests of society: Responsible AI edtech companies must work hand-in-hand with educators at every level to develop and enhance AI platforms built for true learning. Generic direct answer generation AI tools, like ChatGPT, have no place in the classroom. AI must be used as a tool for learning, not shortcuts and cheating. AI will never replace teachers. AI is a tool to help teachers, to save them time and free them up to focus on their students. Any AI tool introduced to classrooms must be designed to promote responsible studying and true learning. This is a list that will grow and evolve over time, but we have to start somewhere. Tomorrow is Too Late We have an opportunity right now, today, to act. We're already seeing the devastating effects of ChatGPT on our students and the worst side effects won't even show up for years to come. We have a chance to change course and realize all of the amazing things AI can bring to our students but only if we act now. It's time to introduce responsible AI use to every student, everywhere, including productivity tips, prompt strategies, collaborative tutors, and true workforce prep for the AI world. AI can have such a positive impact on education. It can help us realize true equality of opportunity for every student who wants to succeed. The time to act is now. There are alternatives. There is a better way and a better future. If we don't act soon, we risk lobotomizing an entire generation and making them completely dependent on AI systems to do everything for them; but maybe that's what some want . . . Let's get to work.
Sustainability Times
4 days ago
- Sustainability Times
'They Blamed the Students—But It Was Us': Professors Caught Using ChatGPT as Secret Weapon While Cracking Down on Classroom Cheating
IN A NUTSHELL 📚 Teachers are increasingly relying on digital assistants to handle educational tasks, reshaping traditional teaching methods. are increasingly relying on digital assistants to handle educational tasks, reshaping traditional teaching methods. 🤖 The use of AI by educators often goes unmentioned, leading to student concerns over transparency and trust in the classroom. by educators often goes unmentioned, leading to student concerns over transparency and trust in the classroom. ⚖️ Universities are crafting ethical frameworks to manage AI's role in education, promoting disclosure and human oversight. to manage AI's role in education, promoting disclosure and human oversight. 🔍 Students are becoming adept at identifying AI-generated content, highlighting the need for honest communication about its use. In recent years, the educational landscape has undergone a profound transformation as teachers increasingly rely on digital assistants to aid in their duties. This silent shift is reshaping the very essence of knowledge transmission. What was once a straightforward exchange of wisdom between teacher and student is now mediated by artificial intelligence (AI), raising questions about transparency and trust. While the integration of AI into education may seem a natural progression in a tech-driven world, it becomes contentious when its use remains concealed from students, challenging the fundamental trust that underpins educational relationships. The Silent Automation of Teaching Practices The use of artificial intelligence in education is not solely a tool for students; teachers, too, are increasingly harnessing its capabilities to streamline their workloads. From creating instructional materials to crafting quizzes and providing personalized feedback, AI's presence is growing in the classroom. Notably, David Malan at Harvard has developed a chatbot to assist in his computer science course, while Katy Pearce at the University of Washington uses AI trained on her evaluation criteria to help students progress even in her absence. Despite these advancements, some educators choose to keep their use of AI under wraps. Overwhelmed by grading and time constraints, they delegate certain tasks to AI without disclosure. Rick Arrowood, a professor at Northeastern University, admitted to using generative tools for creating his materials without thoroughly reviewing them or informing his students. Reflecting on this, he expressed regret over his lack of transparency, wishing he had better managed the practice. 'These Kids Read in 6 Months': This Elementary Teacher's Shocking Method Defies 30 Years of Reading Education Norms AI Use in Education Sparks Student Tensions The non-transparent use of AI by educators has led to growing unease among students. Many notice the impersonal style and repetitive vocabulary of AI-generated content, prompting them to become adept at identifying artificial texts. This has led to instances like that of Ella Stapleton, a Northeastern student who discovered a direct ChatGPT request within her course materials. She filed a complaint and demanded a refund of her tuition fees. On platforms like Rate My Professors, criticism of standardized and ill-suited content is mounting, with students perceiving such materials as incompatible with quality education. This sense of betrayal is heightened when students are prohibited from using the same tools. For many, teachers' reliance on AI signifies injustice and hypocrisy, fueling further discontent. 'This Should Never Have Happened': Scientists Horrified as World's First Octopus Farm Sparks Ethical and Ecological Uproar Ethical Frameworks for AI Use in Education In response to these tensions, several universities are establishing regulatory frameworks to govern AI's role in education. The University of Berkeley, for instance, mandates explicit disclosure of AI-generated content, coupled with human verification. French institutions are following suit, acknowledging that a complete ban is no longer feasible. An investigation by Tyton Partners, cited by the New York Times, found that nearly one in three professors regularly uses AI, yet few disclose this to their students. This disparity fuels conflict, as emphasized by Paul Shovlin from Ohio University. He argues that the tool itself is not the issue, but rather how it is integrated. Teachers still play a crucial role as human interlocutors capable of interpretation, evaluation, and dialogue. 'China Prepares for War in Space': HQ-29 Missile System Can Destroy Satellites and Ballistic Threats Mid-Air Some educators are choosing to embrace transparency by explaining and regulating their AI use, using it to enhance interactions. Though still a minority, this approach could pave the way for reconciling pedagogical innovation with restored trust. As we navigate this evolving educational landscape, the balance between technology and transparency remains a pressing concern. How can educators and institutions work together to ensure that the integration of AI enhances rather than hinders the educational experience? This article is based on verified sources and supported by editorial technologies. Did you like it? 4.5/5 (30)
Washington Post
4 days ago
- Politics
- Washington Post
How Trump's antisemitism task force is leading an assault on DEI, colleges
In 2021, future vice president JD Vance delivered a speech titled 'The Universities Are the Enemy.' A few years later, during his campaign, Donald Trump called college leaders 'Marxist maniacs.' Now their administration is using the full force of the federal government to investigate long-standing conservative complaints about universities, making sweeping demands and cutting billions of dollars in federal funding as it works to bring campuses to heel.
Telegraph
6 days ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Universities scramble to give out offers so they don't go bust
Universities have made a record number of offers this year as vice-chancellors scramble to fill places amid a spiralling funding crisis. More than two million offers were handed out to people applying for UK undergraduate courses starting this September, up 74,000 compared to last year and marking a nine per cent jump since 2023. It means more than nine in 10 people who applied for British university degrees before the January deadline this year have secured at least one offer. International students saw the highest rise in their overall offer rate, with almost two-thirds – or 64 per cent – of individual university applications proving successful. It is up from 59 per cent last year and 55 per cent in 2023. British teenagers will go into this summer's A-level results day more confident than last year's cohort, as the UK 18-year-old offer rate also rose, although marginally. Students can apply for up to five university courses through Ucas, with 80 per cent of entries from British Year 13 pupils resulting in an offer this year – up 1.2 per cent compared to 2024. It comes despite the application rate amongst UK 18-year-olds declining this year, suggesting universities have been more generous in handing out offers as they clamber to fill seats. Many institutions are grappling with worsening financial problems following a drop in overseas students and years of frozen tuition fees, with The Telegraph revealing earlier this year that a record 43 per cent are now in deficit. Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi) think tank, told PA: 'Universities nearly always prefer to fill their places than to have to close courses or make staff redundant, so I am not surprised that they are in such a scramble for students. 'Universities currently lose money on average on each home student but if you can enrol a few more students on lots of your courses then fewer of your courses will make a financial loss.' The Government announced last year that tuition fees for UK students will rise from September for the first time in eight years. Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary, confirmed the annual price of a degree will increase from the current £9,250 to £9,535 to help reverse the eroding value of domestic tuition fees, which have remained frozen since 2017. But vice-chancellors have warned the move will only go a small way in helping universities through the current crisis, after a dramatic drop in lucrative international students dealt a hammer blow to their finances. Universities have been rushing in recent months to boost their attraction to prospective foreign students, who typically pay much higher tuition fees than those from the UK. Ucas data published on Thursday showed the efforts may have begun to pay off, with huge rises in applications from some countries. It includes a 14 per cent increase in applications from the US, which may be in part driven by President Donald Trump's attack on America's top universities. Mr Trump has slashed funding for many elite US colleges, which he claimed have become hotbeds for ideological indoctrination. It has meant many American universities are now under pressure to bow to Mr Trump's demands for fear of losing research grants and other funding. The US leader said he wants to grant the federal government the power to vet admissions and influence hiring, and has also ramped up security checks on foreign student visas. Meanwhile, undergraduate applications from China jumped 10 per cent this year to hit a record 33,870, despite the growing popularity and reputation of Beijing's domestic universities. Nigerian applications to UK undergraduate degrees also rose by 23 per cent, in what will prove a lifeline for UK universities highly dependent on students from the country. There were fears that a Nigerian currency crisis, which pushed the naira to an all-time low against the dollar last year, could deter applications and place some British universities under significant financial pressure. The Telegraph revealed last year that Nigerian students make up more than a quarter of the postgraduate student population at some UK institutions, including Robert Gordon University and the University of Bradford. Ucas data primarily covers undergraduate degrees, but most international students come to the UK to study postgraduate courses. The latest figures suggest overseas students may be increasingly opting for undergraduate degrees in Britain following a crackdown on postgraduates being allowed to bring family members with them. The previous Conservative government imposed a ban on foreign student dependent visas for most postgraduate students, with a small number of exceptions including for PhD students. International students enrolling on UK undergraduate courses are unable to bring family members with them in most cases, but the ban on student dependents may have reduced the attraction of postgraduate courses.
