Editorial

Abstract

‘Are we done with generative AI yet?’, a colleague has mooted in a recent conversation. After the initial trepidation caused by the perceived grave consequences of GenAI for higher education, the volume of institutional and individual responses to the challenge descended on us like a weighted blanket, bringing a sense of comfort and gently reducing our stress levels associated with the quiet revolution we never thought we’d have to deal with. Among the many analyses, commentaries, and interventions, Russell Group universities issued their set of ‘principles on the use of generative AI tools in education’ (Russell Group, 2023)providing some much needed, if vague, guidelines for the sector. Meanwhile, international Learning and Teaching colleagues crowdsourced ‘Creative ideas to use AI in education’ (Nerantzi et al., 2023),and the very active Facebook group ‘Higher Ed discussions of AI writing’ became for many a platform offering unmatched levels of emotional and specialised support including examples of authentic in-class tasks that engage GenAI ethically and real exchanges with students responding to them, as well as classroom policies and syllabi, alongside sharing collective hopes and individual frustrations. With the new semester now bubbling with possibility, we thus seem relatively confident we can meet its challenges while anticipating just about anything in terms of consequences.