We Need to Talk about GenAI Grading and Tutoring Systems

Generative AI (GenAI) grading and tutoring systems are rapidly entering higher education, promising increased efficiency and personalized learning experiences. We believe this technology should be viewed with caution, particularly in the case of philosophy. In this article, we first outline the nature and purported benefits of these systems. Next, we examine the economic motivations driving their adoption within institutions, such as reducing labor costs. Finally, we argue that these motivations, while compelling to administrators, may fail to consider potential negative consequences. We present six pedagogical reasons to be critical of the widespread implementation of GenAI in education: (1) limitations on teacher efficacy; (2) increased student alienation; (3) the undermining of educators’ duty of care; (4) the outsourcing of core teaching tasks; (5) questions regarding the accuracy and utility of GenAI graders; and (6) the risk of implementing GenAI as a misguided solution to real problems in education.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Association of Philosophy Teachers Studies in Pedagogy
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5840/aaptstudies2025417101
Primary Topic
Distributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

We Need to Talk about GenAI Grading and Tutoring Systems

Gene Flenady, Richard Menary, Thomas Corbin, Jennifer Duke-Yonge et al.
American Association of Philosophy Teachers Studies in Pedagogy
Distributed and Parallel Computing Systems
article

We Need to Talk about GenAI Grading and Tutoring Systems

Gene Flenady, Richard Menary, Thomas Corbin, Jennifer Duke-Yonge, Jean‐Philippe Deranty, Alexander James Gillett
article en

Abstract

Generative AI (GenAI) grading and tutoring systems are rapidly entering higher education, promising increased efficiency and personalized learning experiences. We believe this technology should be viewed with caution, particularly in the case of philosophy. In this article, we first outline the nature and purported benefits of these systems. Next, we examine the economic motivations driving their adoption within institutions, such as reducing labor costs. Finally, we argue that these motivations, while compelling to administrators, may fail to consider potential negative consequences. We present six pedagogical reasons to be critical of the widespread implementation of GenAI in education: (1) limitations on teacher efficacy; (2) increased student alienation; (3) the undermining of educators’ duty of care; (4) the outsourcing of core teaching tasks; (5) questions regarding the accuracy and utility of GenAI graders; and (6) the risk of implementing GenAI as a misguided solution to real problems in education.

American Association of Philosophy Teachers Studies in PedagogyVol. 10
Macquarie University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
Distributed and Parallel Computing Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

We Need to Talk about GenAI Grading and Tutoring Systems — Gene Flenady, Richard Menary, et al. · American Association of Philosophy Teachers Studies in Pedagogy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS