Last year HEPI reported 95% of students were using gen AI, but recent research from Stephen Gow and Sam Illingworth cast doubt on this figure. Today I’m joined by Stephen to talk through some of the key finding of his Leverhume Trust funded study that draws data from over 7,000 participants. What do students really think about gen AI in higher education, and how should this shape the way we treat it in the curriculum?

Dr Stephen Gow was the Leverhulme Research Fellow at the Department of Learning and Teaching Enhancement (DLTE) at Edinburgh Napier University. During this role he led the Student Experiences on Generative AI Project (StudentXGenAI), this project carried out the StudentXGenAI Survey with a response rate of over 7000 students at UK institutions and interviews with students across the UK in addition to integrating GenAI into the research process. He is an expert on academic integrity, assessment and GenAI, and the Chair of the Northern Academic Integrity Forum. He is now associate staff with Department of Education, University of York and available for consultation and research projects related to GenAI in education. He can be contacted at stephen.gow@york.ac.uk or via Linkedin: Stephen Gow | LinkedIn

Chung, J., Henderson, M., Slade, C., Liang, Y., Pepperell, N., Corbin, T., Walton, J., Yu, AS., Bearman, M., Buckingham Shum, S., Fawns, T., McCluskey, T., McLean, J., Oberg, G., Seligmann, A., Shibani, A., Bakharia, A., Lim, LA., Matthews, KE. (2026). The use and usefulness of GenAI in higher education: Student experience and perspectives. Computers and Education Open, Available at: doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2026.100347.

Gow S, Illingworth S (2026), "Dynamic tensions: an AI-assisted critical scoping review of university students' qualitative experiences of GenAI". Artificial Intelligence in Education, Vol. 2 No. 1 pp. 67–89, Available at: doi: 10.1108/AIIE-06-2025-0151

Gow, S. and Illingworth, S. (2026) “It is a temptation to get it to do the work…” – student experiences of GenAI in UK universities. 09 Apr 2026. Advance HE. [Online]. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/news-and-views/it-temptation-get-it-do-work-student-experiences-genai-uk-universities [Accessed 20 April 2026].

The Castlereagh Statement is available at: https://castlereagh.ai/

00:00 Welcome and guest intro

01:12 Duolingo streak talk

06:20 Tech backlash and attention

10:46 Generative AI literacy risks

19:23 Introducing StudentXGenAI

22:31 Survey design and access

24:54 Who uses GenAI and why

27:23 Productivity versus learning

31:42 Massification and student pressures

34:26 Research goals and policy impact

34:48 Survey design choices

35:52 UK vs Australia findings

36:47 Why usage rates differ

38:15 Regulation and risk

39:07 Learning tool doubts

41:11 Assessment scales explained

45:42 Trust and honesty data

49:44 Fairness and incentives

56:55 Exams after COVID

01:03:59 Data privacy and costs

01:07:31 Future research

Language students using machine translation has certainly raised lots of questions for those of us teaching English for Academic Purposes over the past few years. But most of the conversation has been around its impact on written compositions. A new study by Lamont and Cirocki looks at how and why it's changing the way international students interact verbally with each other and their teachers.

We're joined today by James Lamont, the lead author of the study, to dig into the data and talk about the implications for the language classroom. What steps do teachers need to take to enable learning to actually take place?

Jiaoyue Chen is an Academic Practice Adviser at the University of York, where she supports colleagues’ professional journey through the PGCAP programme, York Professional and Academic Development scheme recognition, and the York SoTL network. With a background in Applied Linguistics, she worked as a Lecturer in English Language and Education at Huazhong University of Science and Technology in China. She still returns to this area of research with great interest, but also seeks to disentangle the nuanced relationship between SoTL and formal pedagogical research to better support student learning.

James Lamont is an Associate Lecturer at the University of York in the Department of Education and the School of Business and Society, where he supports student skills development. His research interests are student use of technology and developing working relationships across student cohorts.

Lamont, J., & Cirocki, A. (2025). Talking to algorithms, not students: Students’ and lecturers’ perceptions of machine translation in academic discussion. The JALT CALL Journal, 21(3), 103256. https://doi.org/10.29140/jaltcall.v21n3.103256

00:00 Intro to MT in the classroom 01:19 James Lamont and Jiaoyue Chen 03:08 Talking to algorithms 04:58 Groves and Mund’s previous work on MT 04:58 Real time translation in class 07:36 Language acquisition concerns 12:19 Tasks versus learning goals 16:15 The impact of MT on non-language learning 20:42 Overreliance and false confidence 26:00 Accuracy culture and dependency 29:48 Policy gaps and overreliance 31:04 Setting classroom expectations 32:57 Phone boundaries and culture 34:15 Structured tech use phases 35:23 Proficiency gaps and support 38:06 Accents, idioms and listening load 43:24 Anxiety comfort and safe seminars 48:50 Privacy, recording and shame 51:48 Student buy-in and agency 54:56 Ideal classroom and future research 58:03 Final Takeaways And Paper Credit

Are smartphones and laptops enabling or impeding students’ progress in class? On the plus side they give access to a wealth of resources, but they can also kill interaction and provide any number of distractions. Today we dig into the research on devices in class with educational psychologist Paul Kirschner.

Paul also clears up the confusion around cognitive offloading, what it really means and what’s actually happening when we use AI. Is it really just another tool like a calculator?

We talk about these and a range of other learning tech topics, including future research directions for multimedia assessment, and what we can reasonably ask of practitioner research.

Check out Paul's Substack via the link below, and the posts for today's conversation on phones in the classroom and cognitive offloading vs outsourcing.

https://substack.com/@paulkirschner173727

Paul Kirschner is one of the most influential voices in the national and international education debate. For decades, he has done research on and has been translating scientific insights about learning, memory and teaching into clear applications for education.

Paul is professor emeritus at the Open University of the Netherlands, honorary doctor (Doctor Honoris Causa) at the University of Oulu (Finland), visiting professor at the Thomas More University of Applied Sciences in Flanders and owner of the educational consultancy kirschner-ED. Previously, he worked as a teacher of Science, Chemistry and Mathematics in secondary education and was active in school boards and participation councils of both secondary and secondary education.

He is regarded worldwide as a leading expert in his field and has published approximately 450 scientific articles, in addition to several hundred popular science contributions and blogs for teachers and school leaders. In addition, he is the first or co-author of several influential and widely read books, including Instructional Illusions, How Learning Happens, How Teaching Happens, Evidence-Informed Learning Design, Ten Steps to Complex Learning, Developing Curriculum for Deep Thinking and Urban Legends about Learning and Education.

Sungu, A., Choudhury, P. K., & Bjerre-Nielsen, A. (2025). Removing phones from classrooms improves academic performance. Available at SSRN: ssrn.com/abstract=5370727 or dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5370727

Phil is joined by Lily Abadal and Nidhi Sachdeva to talk about reducing device reliance, rebuilding in-class writing, and using technology with clear pedagogical intent. Lily describes redesigning written assessments by breaking the traditional term paper into smaller in-class, long-form writing components, encouraging device-free classroom culture without heavy policing, and emphasizing silence, reflection, discussion, and mentorship.

Nidhi brings research from cognitive science to bear on tech-related concerns like distraction, cognitive load, and outsourcing thinking. She guides us through the limitations of flipped learning, and why we might want to bring some COVID legacy independent tasks back into the classroom.

We also lay out the stall for why personalised feedback, workbooks and visible teacher investment in students are things worth hanging on to.

Lily Abadal is an Assistant Professor of Instruction in the Philosophy Department at the University of South Florida - St. Petersburg. She specializes in normative ethics, applied ethics, moral psychology, and philosophy of psychology. Her recent interests include moral injury, character formation, and AI Ethics. She explores all things through a Neo-Aristotelian lens.

She’s interested in helping mission-centered schools design pedagogical strategies, develop integrity-centered policies, re-imagine assessments that align with their values, and encourage genuine character formation in the age of AI.

Lily writes about all of the above on her Substack, Wisdom in the Machine Age: https://substack.com/@wisdominthemachineage

You can also find more information on her website: https://www.drlilyabadal.com/

Nidhi Sachdeva is a leading Canadian Science of Learning researcher, specializing in evidence-informed learning design, post-secondary education, and educational technology. She teaches online learning and microlearning from a cognitive science perspective at OISE’s Department of Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning at the University of Toronto. A recognized expert in translating educational research into practical classroom strategies, she has been featured on numerous podcasts and currently serves as Chair of researchED Toronto.

Check out Nidhi’s Science of Learning Substack. Listen to Nidhi’s previous TELSIG podcast appearance on education myth busting.

Abadal, L.M. (2025) Only the Humanities can save the university from AI. [Online]. Public Discourse. Available at: https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2025/07/98429/ [Accessed 23 January 2026].

Kirschner, P. (2025), When phones go out the window, learning comes in the door. [Online]. Krischnered. Available at: http://www.kirschnered.nl/2025/11/01/when-phones-go-out-the-window-learning-comes-in-the-door/ [Accessed 23 January 2026].

Oakley, B., Johnston, M. Chen, K, Jung, E. and Sejnowski, T. (2025). The Memory Paradox: Why Our Brains Need Knowledge in an Age of AI. [Preprint]. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.11015

00:00 Intro 02:34 Lily’s background: ChatGPT forces a rethink of assessment 04:08 Rebuilding the term paper: in-class slow writing and device-free culture 08:29 Nidhi’s stance: thoughtful EdTech (not a tech war) 12:30 Offloading vs outsourcing: what cognitive science says about AI/tech 15:45 What is the classroom for now? Mentorship, practice, and attention 18:29 Lily’s new class design: handouts, recall, annotation, discussion 30:03 Lessons learned from flipped teaching 35:40 The practicalities of unplugging in Higher Ed 37:21 Lily’s case against ChatGPT in Philosophy 44:46 Distinguishing EdTech from AI and social media 53:48 In-class writing as an alternative to exams 55:04 Workbooks and human feedback 01:02:02 Beyond essays: low-Stakes Mastery Quizzes & Assessment for Learning 01:03:25 Why Handwriting Works: Engagement, Cognitive Science & Iterating as a Teacher

Deanne, James and I gather around a virtual Yuletide fireplace, roast chestnuts and perform that time-honoured festive tradition of chewing over key moments in learning tech and EAP from the year gone by. Much as the shepherds probably did.

Is a full in-class digital detox a good idea, and is this a weird thing to suggest in a technology enhanced learning podcast? Did we ever figure out whether students real-time subtitling us is a problem? Would any of us pay for AI-generated music? Did we get carried away with flipped learning after COVID?

As we look back on the debates that have lit up 2025, we'd like to wish all our listeners an awesome holiday and a happy new year.

Listen to Klaus Mundt and Michael Groves on TELSIG

Eaton, S. E. (2025). Global Trends in Education: Artificial Intelligence, Postplagiarism, and Future‑focused Learning for 2025 and Beyond – 2024–2025 Werklund Distinguished Research Lecture. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 21(12). https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40979-025-00187-6.pdf

Flenady, G., & Sparrow, R. (2025). Cut the bullshit: why GenAI systems are neither collaborators nor tutors. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2025.2497263

Kirschner, P., (2025), When phones go out the window, learning comes in the door. Krischnered. Available at: http://www.kirschnered.nl/2025/11/01/when-phones-go-out-the-window-learning-comes-in-the-door/

Plate, D., & Hutson, J. (2025). The intellectual bankruptcy of anti-AI academic alarmism: a rebuttal. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2025.2562594

00:00 Intro to the guests 02:41 James’ new paper on student use of translation 10:24 The case for digital detox 14:03 Pedagogy leads 16:41 Phil’s phones away experiment 19:55 Has flipped learning failed? 26:03 Do students still need English? 29:31 Do unsupervised assessments provide evidence of learning? 34:50 The AI bullshit paper 38:04 Plug for the TELSIG symposium 39:54 Would you pay for AI music? 46:47 Reverting to what makes for good learning 51:35 TELSIG’s Christmas message

James Lamont is an Associate Lecturer in Skills Development, Department of Education, University of York in the United Kingdom. His research interests include the effects of generative AI on student thought processes and outputs, and how universities can adapt to this new environment.

Deanne Cobb-Zygadlo has been an EAP tutor at Nazarbayev University since 2015. She is the co-coordinator of the Technology-Enhanced Learning Special Interest Group (TELSIG) with BALEAP, which is the accreditation organization for the NU Foundation Year Program. She is also a member of the ENAI (European Network for Academic Integrity) Policies Working Group.

Today I’m talking to Samantha Curle from the University of Bath about her recent article, Generative AI and the future of writing for publication: insights from applied linguistics journal editors.

The peer review process is under increasing strain. With the explosion of submissions to academic journals since ChatGPT became available to all, editorial boards are struggling to keep pace. Peer reviewers are in short supply, and this has prompted (pardon the pun) an increased use of AI in the review process itself, leading to concerns that some articles may be making it to print without having been subjected to the appropriate level of scrutiny.

Samantha and I dig into the data from her study of journal editors and discuss the cracks that are appearing in the system. We also talk about pressure to publish, questionable research practices, the replication crisis, opaque data sets, the future of publishing and more. Samantha also offers advice to teacher researchers looking to publish, and her plans for future projects.

Guest bio Samantha Curle is a Reader in Applied Linguistics at the University of Bath & Adjunct Professor at Khazar University, Azerbaijan. She is Co-founder of the Cambridge ReachSci Mini-PhD on Multilingual Education & a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy & the Royal Society of Arts. She read for her DPhil in Education (Applied Linguistics) at the University of Oxford, having previously read for two MSc degrees there. Her research focuses on English Medium Instruction (EMI) in higher education, examining factors that influence academic achievement, such as English proficiency & psychological constructs. Her research spans across four continents (Africa, Asia, Europe, South America) and she has published in journals such as Language Teaching & Journal of Engineering Education.

References Moorhouse, B., Consoli, S. and Curle, S. (2025). Generative AI and the future of writing for publication: insights from applied linguistics journal editors. Applied Linguistics Review. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2025-0021

Samantha’s Research Gate profile https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Samantha-Curle Follow Samantha on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/samanthacurle/

Further reading Hinz, A. (2025). Navigating Generative AI in Academic Publishing: An Interview With Benjamin Luke Moorhouse. De Gruyter Conversations. Available at: https://blog.degruyter.com/navigating-generative-ai-in-academic-publishing-an-interview-with-benjamin-luke-moorhouse/

Gibney, E. (2025) Scientists hide messages in papers to game AI peer review. Nature. Available at:doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-025-02172-y

Kurzgesagt - In a nutshell. (2025). AI Slop is destroying the internet. [Video]. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zfN9wnPvU0 [Accessed 16th October 2025].

Simons, J. (2024) Harvard’s Gino Report Reveals How A Dataset Was Altered. Data Colada. Available at: https://datacolada.org/118 [Accessed 11th August 2025]

Timecodes 00:00 Introduction 01:49 Samantha Curle 06:22 The spike in submissions 11:05 Why the peer review process was already struggling 13:09 AI generated reviews 15:50 The importance of rigorous peer review 24:31 Rethinking the process 29:03 Questionable research practices 34:05 What has changed in the wake of the replication crisis? 35:34 The difficulty of accessing data sets 40:35 Who can instigate change? 44:07 Advice for teachers looking to publish 48:39 Samantha’s future projects

Many of the skills and language conventions that we see in academia can serve as barriers to students, especially to those for whom English is not a first language. Translanguaging argues for a more inclusive approach to these conventions, and looks for ways in which we can take a more pluralistic view of what kinds of communication are seen as acceptable.

Kelly Webb-Davies joins us to talk through some of the core tenets of translanguaging, how it can help students and the role of technology in levelling the playing field. We also discuss some of the practicalities around translanguaging’s implementation in the classroom, recent developments in assessments, authorship and intelligibility, and a whole lot more.

Kelly delivered a webinar for TELSIG last year that also offers a clear and comprehensive introduction to translanguaging: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-600GB8w-WQ

Kelly Webb-Davies is a Lead Business Technologist at the Centre and her academic background is in linguistics, with degrees from the University of Western Australia and the University of Melbourne. Before joining Oxford, she lectured on phonetics and phonology at the University of Bangor and was a Trinity DipTESOL-qualified English for Academic Purposes tutor and Technology Enhanced Learning and Language Lead at Bangor University International College, where working with international students and responding to their specific needs informed her practice of integrating AI productively to assist with their academic and linguistic proficiency.

Her focus is thoughtfully integrating AI into higher education in ways that enhance communication, reduce bias, and expand access to knowledge. She is particularly interested in how AI can be used to address the unique challenges of groups facing linguistic barriers and neurodivergence, creating more inclusive and accessible educational environments. She advocates for a balanced approach that maintains human involvement and fosters critical thinking alongside AI implementation and her work explores innovative ways to incorporate this philosophy into pedagogical and assessment design, ensuring that AI tools complement and enrich education.

Deanne Cobb-Zygadlo has been an EAP tutor at Nazarbayev University since 2015. She is the co-coordinator of the Technology-Enhanced Learning Special Interest Group (TELSIG) with BALEAP, which is the accreditation organization for the NU Foundation Year Program. She is also a member of the ENAI (European Network for Academic Integrity) Policies Working Group.

Lee, J.W., (2016) Beyond Translingual Writing. College English. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/44805916

Jacob, S., Tate, T., and Warschauer, M., (2025). Emergent AI-assisted discourse: a case study of a second language writer authoring with ChatGPT. De Gruyter Brill. Available at: https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jccall-2024-0011/html

Tan, S. (2024) Translanguaging in second language writing processes. Linguistics and Education. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898589824000664?via%3Dihub

Wei, L. (2022). Translanguaging as a political stance: implications for English language education. ELT Journal. Available at: https://academic.oup.com/eltj/article/76/2/172/6483197

Zhou, S., Zhao, S., Groves, M. (2022). Towards a digital bilingualism? Students’ use of machine translation in international higher education. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158522001138?via=ihub

00:00 Deanne takes over 01:46 Kelly Webb-Davies 03:11 What is translanguaging? 05:11 Breaking into academic English 08:11 Disrupting the hegemony 13:30 The origins of translanguaging and overlap with World Englishes 17:33 The art of simple communication 21:16 Judith Butler’s use of academese 27:00 Is translaguaging too woke? 32:20 Writing isn’t always thinking 35:45 Shifting the responsibility from the speaker to the listener 40:25 Increasing variety in assessment 48:00 Is it fair to ask students to deal with non-standard language? 54:01 Applying inclusivity to journal submission guidelines