This applies both to students and professors, because older generations may have more difficulty in securing grants if AI is not part of their research proposals. “In competitive situations, AI will benefit the one who understands how to use it. And this will lead to some widening between developed and undeveloped countries,” he commented. Professor Davy Cheng, Founding Dean of Medicine at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, suggested that the disruptive AI technology intersected during COVID-19 has widened the medical education gap in AI knowledge and application in the healthcare system. His School has embraced and acted on this challenge by integrating AI across its medical curriculum. Professor Cheng advocated that universities should also train their faculty to adopt and integrate new AI technologies in teaching and assessment, as well as train a new generation of physicians to be AI- compatible. “My concern is that many of our physician teachers and professors are not ready to master AI in teaching as they don’t have this skillset,” he said. “So how do we proactively prepare our medical students and faculty to reduce this gap in AI medical education and healthcare practice in modern medicine?” Professor Lisa Roberts, President and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Exeter, also questioned how
technology and data analytics could be used proactively to enhance engagement and outcomes among students. Professor Terry responded to the comments noting that the digital divides described by Professor Song and Professor Block were two sides of the same problem, which is the existence of education divisions and inequities in society. “The educational division and inequity in our societies are getting more embedded and it’s something that our universities have to address because parts of our community are going to be left behind if we don’t do that,” she remarked. Universities should also adopt multiple forms of assessment and teach students and staff how to use AI ethically and appropriately. She also supported using the student data already available to examine whether universities are meeting their responsibilities to their students. Professor Paul noted that even with free tuition in his country, there is a need to integrate new graduates into society, which AI and other technologies could help with as a first step. He also argued that when the reward system for academics is largely based on research performance, this could be a hurdle to overcome when asking people to adopt new educational tools. Despite all of these concerns, there was clear support among all participants for embracing the digital disruption. Professor Sugiyama cited the case at Nagoya University, where students are prohibited from using AI in entrance exams. “Some members of our university say, why not allow them to use AI to just check things or get information? What is wrong with that? They are a new generation to me. In any case, it is inevitable that AI will be used,” he said. The session revealed how universities have been working through the challenges and opportunities posed by the advent of new technologies. COVID-19 showed that, when circumstances dictate, universities can quickly adapt to new ways of teaching and learning. AI is again disrupting things, but this time there is a deeper awareness of the digital divide, both across and within jurisdictions. Forging ahead, universities are encouraged to remember their missions of knowledge creation and serving the public good, and to address the challenge of unequal distribution of technological resources and unequal access to the benefits of an in- person education.
Some members of our university say, why not allow them to use AI to just check things or get information? What is wrong with that? They are a new generation to me. In any case, it is inevitable that AI will be used.
Professor Naoshi Sugiyama President, Nagoya University
They should also work with students so they understand the biases, limitations and applications of new tools, and provide safe spaces for these difficult discussions. Professor Paul addressed universities’ role in knowledge and truth directly, arguing that sometimes universities act as exclusive owners and should perhaps be more open in their thinking. Digitising collections is one way of doing that – he pointed to an example where Nigerian artefacts being held in Germany were digitised so students could study them that way, then returned to their home country. Professor Gong and Professor Sugiyama both cautioned against over-reacting to AI and digital technologies. Professor Gong pointed out that in the 1980s, parents worried the computer would undermine children’s mathematical skills but that proved not to be the case. Professor Sugiyama noted that AI tools could allow Japanese students to focus on the content of their work. Questions from the floor further revealed some of the issues at stake. Professor Yonghua Song, Rector of the University of Macau, was especially concerned with the
digital divide, which he sees as problematic along three aspects, including infrastructure, development of digital literacy, and regulation and policy, which can impede access to digital tools. For instance, some students from his university who were based on the Chinese Mainland could not access certain software programmes during the pandemic. “We talk about digital disruption and AI and the impact of higher education, but I see the digital divide as a challenge for the whole world,” he said. Professor Gene D Block, Chancellor of the University of California, Los Angeles, highlighted a different kind of digital divide in his country. As the cost of bandwidth continues to decrease, the opportunity for digital learning becomes more attainable. However, the cost of in-person education remains high. “Do we run a risk, especially in developed countries where the have-nots take their education remotely, and the haves get the advantages of residential education?” he asked. Professor Banchong Mahaisavariya, President of Mahidol University, suggested ChatGPT could be acceptable if used for individual purposes, but create unfair advantages when used in competitive circumstances.
15
16
Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter maker