Cut the bullshit: why GenAI systems are neither collaborators nor tutors

18Citations
Citations of this article
60Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

The rapid development of Generative AI (GenAI) technologies has led to widespread endorsement of GenAI systems serving as a ‘personal tutor’ and learning ‘collaborator’ in higher education. However, because GenAI outputs are prone to ‘hallucinations,’ it has been suggested that students take responsibility for the accuracy of GenAI contributions to their learning. We rehabilitate Plato’s scepticism regarding writing and draw on Harry Frankfurt’s analysis of ‘bullshit’ to demonstrate that GenAI systems are constitutively epistemically irresponsible. We argue that the expectation on tertiary students to assume responsibility for their so-called ‘tutors’ and ‘collaborators’ is pedagogically perverse, amounting to a demand that students take sole responsibility for the accuracy of claims they are not able to properly assess. Moreover, to the extent that GenAI teaching systems replace students’ interaction with human teachers, it will be increasingly difficult for students to develop the skills and motivation to hold GenAI outputs to disciplinary standards.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Flenady, G., & Sparrow, R. (2026). Cut the bullshit: why GenAI systems are neither collaborators nor tutors. Teaching in Higher Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2025.2497263

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free