My belief is that using AI with real world professoring (I think I may have just created that word!) can be quite effective as each can enhance the other. I often thought that courses like corporate finance could be taught using recordings from the best of the best professors (e.g., Damodoran from NYU - I adored that class & still think of is decades later), complimented by a local professor that students interact with in the flesh. AI just adds another dimension to this by enabling individual interaction at a scale humans can't match. Add to that that we all learn differently - my wife learns more from hearing whilst I'm more visual (it's why she speaks 5 languages and I struggle with 2). AI can learn what works best at an individual student level that ensures a better learning outcome, when coupled with traditional learning.
Oh, and the big classroom where professors call on students should never be replaced! It forces one to come prepared (or risk embarrassment), plus, students do learn from other students for all of us think & process information differently.
The fact that you're thinking this way, Andrew, is 90% of the battle. I pity to kids that sit through the "Bueller Bueller" type professor who drones on for 50 minutes on autopilot.
(referencing the scene from Ferris Bueller's Day Off - a classic for us gen Xers)!
Absolutely agree John! “Real world professoring” should be a thing, and probably a job title.
The best model is not AI versus professor, or video versus classroom. It is layered learning. Let great recorded teaching explain the fundamentals. Let AI personalize the practice, examples, questions, and pace. Then let the human professor do what humans still do best: challenge assumptions, read the room, create pressure, build judgment, and make students think in public.
And yes, the live classroom still matters. Not because embarrassment is the goal, but because preparation, friction, peer learning, and being called into the conversation are part of the workout, as you implied.
The enemy is not technology. The enemy is lazy format design. Sigh.
Sunday, May 31, 2026 (UTC-7): I agree with your positioning, but I, as a member of the so-called Generation Z, believe that reading difficult texts is still the best way to learn. For example: in my last semestre of the MBA, I transformed an online lecture from my instructor into a written transcript with the help of a free software and that significantly improved my comprehension of the topic—instructor was talking about informational and behaviour controls in strategic management. Also, I believe students should be encouraged to write with their hands and fingers more—not just typing; I don't think students should be allowed to bring laptops to classroom, because this practise erodes attention. I remember last year (Summer of 2025), I was reviewing the syllabus on my laptop and the instructor was talking and I barely noticed what was being spoken. This is my take.
I love this take, especially coming from Gen Z, because it cuts through the lazy myth that younger students cannot handle depth. Difficult reading still matters. Handwriting still matters. Silence, attention, and friction still matter.
I think the mistake is thinking “modern format” means making everything easier, shorter, shinier, and laptop friendly. That is not learning design. That is educational candy.
For me, the point is not to replace reading with video, writing with AI, or classrooms with screens. It is to choose the right format for the right learning job. Sometimes that means AI. Sometimes it means a transcript. Sometimes it means closing the laptop, taking notes by hand, and actually being present.
My belief is that using AI with real world professoring (I think I may have just created that word!) can be quite effective as each can enhance the other. I often thought that courses like corporate finance could be taught using recordings from the best of the best professors (e.g., Damodoran from NYU - I adored that class & still think of is decades later), complimented by a local professor that students interact with in the flesh. AI just adds another dimension to this by enabling individual interaction at a scale humans can't match. Add to that that we all learn differently - my wife learns more from hearing whilst I'm more visual (it's why she speaks 5 languages and I struggle with 2). AI can learn what works best at an individual student level that ensures a better learning outcome, when coupled with traditional learning.
Oh, and the big classroom where professors call on students should never be replaced! It forces one to come prepared (or risk embarrassment), plus, students do learn from other students for all of us think & process information differently.
The fact that you're thinking this way, Andrew, is 90% of the battle. I pity to kids that sit through the "Bueller Bueller" type professor who drones on for 50 minutes on autopilot.
(referencing the scene from Ferris Bueller's Day Off - a classic for us gen Xers)!
Absolutely agree John! “Real world professoring” should be a thing, and probably a job title.
The best model is not AI versus professor, or video versus classroom. It is layered learning. Let great recorded teaching explain the fundamentals. Let AI personalize the practice, examples, questions, and pace. Then let the human professor do what humans still do best: challenge assumptions, read the room, create pressure, build judgment, and make students think in public.
And yes, the live classroom still matters. Not because embarrassment is the goal, but because preparation, friction, peer learning, and being called into the conversation are part of the workout, as you implied.
The enemy is not technology. The enemy is lazy format design. Sigh.
100%. Hang in there for you ARE making a difference (even if one at a time!)
Sunday, May 31, 2026 (UTC-7): I agree with your positioning, but I, as a member of the so-called Generation Z, believe that reading difficult texts is still the best way to learn. For example: in my last semestre of the MBA, I transformed an online lecture from my instructor into a written transcript with the help of a free software and that significantly improved my comprehension of the topic—instructor was talking about informational and behaviour controls in strategic management. Also, I believe students should be encouraged to write with their hands and fingers more—not just typing; I don't think students should be allowed to bring laptops to classroom, because this practise erodes attention. I remember last year (Summer of 2025), I was reviewing the syllabus on my laptop and the instructor was talking and I barely noticed what was being spoken. This is my take.
I love this take, especially coming from Gen Z, because it cuts through the lazy myth that younger students cannot handle depth. Difficult reading still matters. Handwriting still matters. Silence, attention, and friction still matter.
I think the mistake is thinking “modern format” means making everything easier, shorter, shinier, and laptop friendly. That is not learning design. That is educational candy.
For me, the point is not to replace reading with video, writing with AI, or classrooms with screens. It is to choose the right format for the right learning job. Sometimes that means AI. Sometimes it means a transcript. Sometimes it means closing the laptop, taking notes by hand, and actually being present.
Keep pushing!