After the pandemic, I looked forward to resuming “normal” teaching only to realise that the new norm was teaching under the spectre of artificial intelligence. Although it is exhilarating to see how generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) have become effective in aggregating data and summarising texts, it is concerning to consider what the future holds for those committed to teaching, like my colleagues and myself. As much as some anthropological discussions appear to be removing the “anthropo” from anthropology, our research, which extends to our teaching, primarily explores and sees value in human conditions and interactions. People matter.
Howard Gardner writes, “If we can mobilise the spectrum of human abilities, not only will people feel better about themselves and more competent; it is even possible that they will also feel more engaged and better able to join the rest of the world community in working for the broader good.” We humans learn best when we engage not only our intellect but also our senses, emotions, and sense of purpose. As a teacher, I seek to enable such embodied, collaborative learning.
With the great diversity of our student body drawn from so many nations, it is exciting for me to foster an interactive environment, in which students bring so many different personal and cultural perspectives to our discussions. I will never think of instant noodles the same way after learning in my “Food, Society & Sustainability” class from my Indian, Italian and Maldivian students about the ways it is consumed and understood in their local cultures. Experiential exercises, such as visits to farmers’ markets, allow students to learn about their material, aesthetic, and social dynamics through physical engagement and sensory attention. Interviews with family members for favourite recipes reveal heart-felt life stories that are entwined with socioeconomic transformations shaping their dietary practices and those of their communities.
When co-teaching the departmental research methods course with Graziella Moraes Silva, we turned our own institutional environment into a site of inquiry, asking students to interview staff about the Respect Campaign conducted at the Institute. Comparing notes and sharing experiences, the students not only analysed their findings but reflected upon how their physical presence, emotional reaction, and social interaction impacted on the flow, content, and interpretation of the interviews. AI-mediated shortcuts, no matter how impressive, cannot replicate the visceral experience of a fieldwork interview or a live debate.
I am not opposed to the use of technology in teaching, AI included. I offer guidance on AI usage and use online platforms to extend discussion beyond the classroom; I will be publishing an article on AI applications in Chinese education. Still, in my view, the best educational advantages of our Institute are its human-centred teaching and deep commitment to bettering the world we study.
This article was published in Globe #37, the Graduate Institute Review.
