{"id":181803,"date":"2025-09-24T11:33:10","date_gmt":"2025-09-24T09:33:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=181803"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:27:55","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:27:55","slug":"je-bent-haast-dom-als-je-geen-chatgpt-gebruikt","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2025\/09\/24\/je-bent-haast-dom-als-je-geen-chatgpt-gebruikt\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018You\u2019re basically stupid if you don\u2019t use ChatGPT\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

Many lecturers are concerned about students using AI tools. But public philosopher Bas Haring sees mostly opportunities: \u201cOutsourcing part of the thinking to AI shouldn\u2019t be forbidden.\u201d Which tasks should be outsourced to AI in education?<\/p>\n

\"\"

Bas Haring.<\/span><\/p>

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tIvar Pel<\/span>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

Bas Haring has ruffled quite a few feathers with his \u2018provocative\u2019 experiment. The Leiden philosopher and professor of public understanding of science outsourced his role as graduation supervisor to AI for one student last academic year. She discussed the progress of her thesis not with him, but with ChatGPT. And it went surprisingly well.<\/p>\n

Haring is enthusiastic about the outcome of the experiment, though not everyone shares his excitement. Unethical, irresponsible, pure poverty or even disgusting \u2013 these were just some of the written reactions. It would, they say, give populists an excuse to cut education budgets even further.<\/p>\n

Perspective<\/h2>

Is it really such a bad idea to leave student supervision to AI \u2013 even partially? And just as important: what is a graduation thesis still worth if AI takes over much of the student\u2019s thinking?<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\t\u2018Do we still do all our own thinking, or can we outsource some of it to the computer, because it simply does it better?\u2019\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

Haring is keen to put his experiment in perspective, he says when we ask him about it. \u201cTwenty-five years ago, there was also something new in the world: the internet. It had exactly the same vibe as now. Back then, I gave classes on the question: what can we do with it? How does the internet change our thinking? Everyone was busy with that then, and now we are again.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cBack then, it was about knowledge becoming available everywhere. Now, with AI, it\u2019s about thinking. Do we still do all our own thinking, or can we outsource some of it to the computer, because it simply does it better?\u201d<\/p>\n

ChatGPT can do that<\/h2>

According to the most recent figures from Statistics Netherlands (CBS), nearly a quarter of Dutch people use an AI program from time to time. Among 18- to 25-year-olds, it\u2019s almost half. But those figures are already over a year old and don\u2019t distinguish between students and other young people.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere\u2019s no getting around it\u201d, says Leiden assistant professor of linguistics Alex Reuneker. \u201cIt\u2019s not allowed in thesis writing, but how can you guarantee it\u2019s really written by students? Some things are bound to slip through without us noticing they came from a tool like that.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cI was reading more and more student reports that were clearly largely written by AI\u201d, says Meryem Janse, former lecturer at Saxion University of Applied Sciences. \u201cThat\u2019s one of the reasons I quit teaching. I noticed educational institutions weren\u2019t flexible enough to adapt to the rise of AI \u2013 but they should be. Otherwise, what is a diploma still worth?\u201d<\/p>\n

For many students, AI has become an integral part of daily life. \u201cI use AI tools for almost everything\u201d, says \u2018Mark\u2019, a master\u2019s student in biomolecular sciences. He prefers not to use his real name in the media. \u201cOfficially, you\u2019re not allowed to use AI for writing texts, but I do it anyway \u2013 and so does everyone I know.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2018Milou\u2019 (also not her real name), a master\u2019s student in healthcare management, uses AI tools several times a week \u2013 as a search engine, to write emails or to format citations correctly. \u201cFor practical things that take me a lot of time, I quickly think: ChatGPT can do that.\u201d<\/p>\n

Speculative<\/h2>

Meanwhile, Bas Haring has seen thesis quality improve significantly since the arrival of ChatGPT. \u201cThat\u2019s because almost all students use AI. The education system just hasn\u2019t yet figured out how to handle it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Haring was one of the first AI students in the Netherlands back in 1988. \u201cIt was still a very speculative field. What AI can do today seemed impossible then.\u201d<\/p>\n

What does the rise of AI mean for higher education?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cWe need to think carefully about what we want students to learn. Students use AI \u2013 they\u2019re not stupid. ChatGPT is available 24 hours a day \u2013 you\u2019re almost stupid if you don\u2019t use it. So how do we make sure a student continues to learn?\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cI always encourage my students to watch lots of films, read literature and visit museums to prepare for their thesis. They sometimes find it frustrating and inefficient. But if you talk to ChatGPT for a moment, it can also give you all kinds of suggestions and ideas. I\u2019m not sure that\u2019s such a bad thing.\u201d<\/p>\n

Isn\u2019t coming up with ideas yourself valuable?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cYes, but as a supervisor I also give prompts. I might say: maybe try looking at it this way. And ChatGPT happens to be very good at that too. It\u2019s not exactly the same process \u2013 with AI it goes faster and you get more varied input. It can help with thinking.\u201d<\/p>\n

But AI doesn\u2019t encourage thinking if it writes your thesis for you, right?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cNo, but if students use it correctly, AI can be stimulating. Like a critical supervisor that offers ideas without spelling everything out.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\t\u2018I can imagine that in a few years we\u2019ll have an AI tool designed specifically for education that provides this kind of supervision without spoon-feeding\u2019\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

But that means it\u2019s the student\u2019s responsibility?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cFor now, yes. I can imagine that in a few years we\u2019ll have an AI tool designed specifically for education that provides this kind of supervision without spoon-feeding. That\u2019s how I use AI myself. When I write a text, I ask: could I phrase this differently, what counterarguments are there, what am I overlooking? It always gives interesting ideas.\u201d<\/p>\n

You trusted your student to use AI. But can we trust all students?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cNo, I wouldn\u2019t say that. I didn\u2019t suggest we fully automate graduation supervision. With the experiment, I merely wanted to raise the question: what can we still teach students, and what tasks are we willing to outsource? That said, I don\u2019t think it\u2019s wise in the long run to use a commercial product like ChatGPT for that purpose.\u201d<\/p>\n

You compare this to the rise of the internet. Back then, the idea was that we\u2019d need less knowledge by heart and focus more on critical thinking.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cThat\u2019s not such a bad idea, is it? Everyone has an encyclopedia in their phone now. Knowledge has become less important. And now thinking is becoming less important too.\u201d<\/p>\n

Does that apply only to \u2018thinking\u2019, or also to \u2018critical thinking\u2019?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cCritical thinking is still relevant, but perhaps less so for certain types of reasoning tasks.\u201d<\/p>\n

What\u2019s the difference?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cCritical thinking is more inquisitive, more precise. It\u2019s hard to define the exact difference between academic reflection and constructing a logical argument, but they\u2019re not the same.\u201d<\/p>\n

So what will be the most important role of education in future?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cI wouldn\u2019t be surprised if, in education, the interpersonal becomes more important than the intellectual. Sitting next to someone, looking someone in the eye, relating to each other. The social aspect. I\u2019ve spoken to GPs about AI in their work. They said a GP has three main tasks: 1) making an initial diagnosis, 2) treating or referring, and 3) offering a listening ear. It\u2019s quite plausible that the first two \u2013 the \u2018intellectual\u2019 tasks \u2013 will become less important. They\u2019ll increasingly be handled by machines. But the \u2018human\u2019 work will remain ours.\u201d<\/p>\n

Open letter<\/h2>

The reality, however, is that many students take the path of least resistance \u2013 and many lecturers are worried. Frans Prins, associate professor at Utrecht University and director of education advice & training: \u201cStudents can now outsource some routine tasks, but we still need to safeguard education quality. There\u2019s a risk students will miss out on learning moments.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lecturer Reuneker says something similar: \u201cWe need to teach students what the risks are and how to engage critically with AI.\u201d<\/p>\n

Some lecturers, however, see no role for AI in the classroom at all and advocate a complete ban. At the end of June, 500 researchers and professors signed an open letter calling for more critical scrutiny of AI in education. \u201cAI use demonstrably hinders student learning and undermines critical thinking\u201d, they wrote.<\/p>\n

What do you think of such a ban?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cI think it\u2019s a completely nonsensical suggestion. What do you think students are doing at home? Of course they\u2019re going to use AI when writing their thesis. If students really are learning less well to think for themselves \u2013 which seems likely to me \u2013 then a ban won\u2019t help. We need to find better ways to use the tool.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWe also don\u2019t just give kids a calculator without teaching them to do sums first. At the same time, people today are indeed worse at mental arithmetic than a hundred years ago. Maybe it\u2019s the same here. We don\u2019t want students to become structurally dumber because of AI, but we shouldn\u2019t block the technology entirely. That\u2019s not even possible.\u201d<\/p>\n

But education programmes don\u2019t have a grip on it yet.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cWe\u2019re in a unique period. Everyone is struggling with it \u2013 especially in the humanities, where a lot of writing is involved.\u201d After all, AI programmes are particularly good at producing text.<\/p>\n

So what is a diploma still worth, then?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cMaybe a few students will slip through the net and get a diploma when they shouldn\u2019t. Universities are understandably concerned about that. Should we make students write texts by hand? Put them in a booth? Perhaps at the beginning of the programme. Later on, you could allow more AI use.\u201d<\/p>\n

And the thesis?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cA thesis shouldn\u2019t be entirely written by AI. But during the defence it quickly becomes clear whether the student is truly the \u2018owner\u2019 of the work. And as a supervisor you speak to the student throughout the process. You\u2019ll notice whether they really have a grip on the topic. But outsourcing part of the thinking shouldn\u2019t be forbidden. That\u2019s why I thought it was an interesting \u2013 and maybe slightly provocative \u2013 experiment.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWriting forces you to think carefully, but it\u2019s not equally meaningful for everyone. I had a student who was interested in street litter. She often went cycling and took photos. She learned more from that than from the writing process.\u201d<\/p>\n

Could the thesis eventually disappear, if it no longer shows what a student can do?<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cEducation is a conservative world. Degree programmes often want everything to stay the same. That\u2019s why theses won\u2019t disappear anytime soon. But something has to change \u2013 though what, exactly? My advice would be to talk to students and ask them how AI can be used wisely. They know everything about it, they use it daily. I think there are a lot of hidden solutions waiting to be uncovered.\u201d<\/p>\n

No oversight on AI in higher education \u2013 yet<\/h2>

Ensuring the quality of education isn\u2019t just the responsibility of the degree programmes themselves. There are also legal requirements and guidelines. But these are lagging behind developments: AI still plays no role.<\/p>\n

Degree programmes at universities and universities of applied sciences are reviewed every six years by accreditation body NVAO. This quality watchdog is not yet concerned with AI in education.<\/p>\n

During reviews, a panel of experts assesses various aspects of the programme, based on fixed standards. \u201cAI is not mentioned in these\u201d, a spokesperson says. Panel members are not trained in assessing AI-related education.<\/p>\n

Education Inspectorate<\/h2>

The Education Inspectorate oversees the system as a whole (not individual programmes). In higher education, inspectors assess issues like social safety, equal opportunities and the quality assurance system.<\/p>\n

The inspectorate is also currently examining \u2018digital resilience and AI in education\u2019. The guiding question: to what extent do university boards ensure digital resilience, and what opportunities and risks do they see for AI in education? But this report isn\u2019t yet finished.<\/p>\n

Academic society KNAW<\/h2>

University students are expected to learn how to conduct research with integrity \u2013 but what role should AI play in this? Science itself doesn\u2019t yet have a clear answer. The Dutch Code of Conduct for Scientific Integrity currently offers no guidelines.<\/p>\n

The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) is currently involved in revising the code. The KNAW says the committee \u2018has been tasked with examining how AI should be included in the code\u2019, but there is \u2018not much to say about that yet\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Read more<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t