All of us started our careers somewhere, and today I'm talking to two old friends and former colleagues about how our years teaching English as a foreign language shaped our view of education and the world. We talk about the resilience and adaptability that those early classroom days taught us, the overwrought lesson plans, learning humility from failure, and how these experiences inform our work now in higher education management, instructional design and ed-tech.

We go on to discuss the direction of education, the resurgence of interest in humanities subjects in the face of AI, staying up to date with knowledge and skills in an ever-changing jobs market, and the general chaos of those unique times in our lives.

Ben Naismith, PhD is a Staff Assessment Scientist at Duolingo where he works on research and development of the Duolingo English Test. Prior to joining Duolingo, Ben worked extensively in the field of English language teaching in numerous contexts as a teacher, teacher trainer, materials developer, assessment specialist, and researcher. His current work and research into the assessment of L2 English proficiency focuses on vocabulary assessment and automated scoring of speaking and writing. His work has been published in journals including Language Testing, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Language Teaching Research, Language Learning, and Assessing Writing, amongst others. He is the lead editor of the forthcoming Routledge Handbook of Digital Language Assessment: Innovations and Insights from the Duolingo English Test.

Andrea Flores is Senior Instructional Designer at MIT Sloan School of Management and Founding member of the Boston AI2030 Chapter. She’s an AI lead and human-centered design practitioner with a diverse background in education, public health, workforce development, and technology. She has worked across non-profits, higher education, and global health, and focuses on human impact and sustainable solutions.

I'm joined by Peter Davidson from Zayed University to discuss the 2023 article by David Brooks: In the Age of AI, Major in Being Human, which claims: "AI will force us humans to double down on those talents and skills that only humans possess. The most important thing about Al may be that it shows us what it can't do, and so reveals who we are and what we have to offer."

What might these ‘human’ skills and attributes be that we will need in the age of AI? In this podcast we will try to identify these human skills and attributes (what might be termed ‘capacities’) that have become more essential to us as humans, as AI becomes embedded in teaching and learning, and in the workplace. It is these human capacities, Peter argues, that will become increasingly important for our us and our students as the impact of AI grows.

See the full list of Essential Human Skills.

Peter Davidson teaches Business Communication and Technical Communication at Zayed University in Dubai, having previously taught in New Zealand, Japan, the UK, and Turkey. He is currently interested in exploring how Generative AI is impacting language teaching and assessment practices, and how it can be leveraged to improve the educational experiences of students.

Peter is presenting at the upcoming BALEAP PIM at Leeds on June 19th.

The framing of autonomy, mastery and purpose that's referred to in the discussion was popularised by Daniel Pink in his 2012 book Drive: the surprising truth about what motivates us. This draws on the work of Richard Ryan and Edward Deci, and Self-Determination Theory.

Anderson, D.J., Rainie, L, & Anderson, J. (2026). Human Wisdom for the Age of AI: A Field Guide to Cultivating Essential Skills. Elon University and AAC&U.

Anderson, J. & Rainie, L. (2025). Being Human in 2035: How Are We Changing in the Age of AI? Imagining the Digital Future Center.

Gerlich, M. A. (2025). AI Tools in Society: Impacts on Cognitive Offloading and the Future of Critical Thinking. Societies, 15(1), 6.

Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial Intelligence in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning. Boston: Center for Curriculum Redesign. https://curriculumredesign.org/wp-content/uploads/AIED-Book-Excerpt-CCR.pdf

Pink, D. H. (2012). Drive: the surprising truth about what motivates us. Edinburgh: Canongate.

Postman, N., & Weingartner, C. (1969). Teaching as a Subversive Activity. New York: Delacorte Press.

Raman, A. (2024). Investing in Human Skills in the Age of AI. LinkedinLearning, California, USA.

Ryan, R and Deci, E. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation,

Social Development, and Well-Being. American Psychological Association. 55 (1). Available at: DOI: 10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68

Last year HEPI reported 95% of students were using gen AI, but recent research from Stephen Gow and Sam Illingworth casts 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