Avoiding GPTennis in Academia: A Call for Responsible AI Use in Education One of the greatest fears in modern education is a phenomenon I call GPTennis. Here’s how it plays out: Faculty outsource lecture creation and assessment design to AI. Students outsource assignment completion and exam preparation to AI. Faculty outsource grading and feedback to AI. And so, the cycle continues. Back and forth, lobbing AI-generated content to one another, semester after semester. This dynamic threatens to reduce the true essence of teaching and learning. Academia’s core purpose — to inspire, mentor, and foster growth through human connection — risks being replaced by sterile automation. Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m a huge advocate for integrating AI into education. When used thoughtfully, AI tools can address real challenges like personalization, efficiency, and resource accessibility. But there’s a critical difference between leveraging AI as a supportive tool and outright outsourcing academic responsibilities to it. When we rely too heavily on AI, we risk eroding our professional knowledge, judgment, and engagement. Teaching becomes transactional. Learning becomes superficial. The challenge for us as educators is to find a balance: Use AI to enhance creativity, not replace it. Let AI handle repetitive tasks, but not diminish our active involvement. Focus on maintaining the authenticity and integrity of our interactions with students. Have you ever witnessed or experienced GPTennis in academia? Let’s open up this conversation and explore ways to avoid it while embracing the positive potential of AI in education. Together, we can ensure that AI remains a tool for empowerment, not a substitute for the human touch in teaching and learning . Follow me D Meenakshi Sundaram . GPTennis #AIinEducation #EdTech #FacultyLife #TeachingWithAI #HigherEducation #AcademicInnovation #AIForEveryone #DMSAcademy
Avoiding GPTennis in Academia:
A Call for Responsible AI Use in Education
One of the greatest fears in modern education is a phenomenon I call GPTennis.
Here’s how it plays out:
Faculty outsource lecture creation and assessment design to AI.
Students outsource assignment completion and exam preparation to AI.
Faculty outsource grading and feedback to AI.
And so, the cycle continues.
Back and forth, lobbing AI-generated content to one another, semester after semester.
This dynamic threatens to reduce the true essence of teaching and learning. Academia’s core purpose — to inspire, mentor, and foster growth through human connection — risks being replaced by sterile automation.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m a huge advocate for integrating AI into education. When used thoughtfully, AI tools can address real challenges like personalization, efficiency, and resource accessibility.
But there’s a critical difference between leveraging AI as a supportive tool and outright outsourcing academic responsibilities to it.
When we rely too heavily on AI, we risk eroding our professional knowledge, judgment, and engagement. Teaching becomes transactional. Learning becomes superficial.
The challenge for us as educators is to find a balance:
Use AI to enhance creativity, not replace it.
Let AI handle repetitive tasks, but not diminish our active involvement.
Focus on maintaining the authenticity and integrity of our interactions with students.
Have you ever witnessed or experienced GPTennis in academia? Let’s open up this conversation and explore ways to avoid it while embracing the positive potential of AI in education.
Together, we can ensure that AI remains a tool for empowerment, not a substitute for the human touch in teaching and learning . Follow me D Meenakshi Sundaram .
