Dead Ideas in Teaching and Learning
Dead Ideas in Teaching and Learning

Dead Ideas in Teaching and Learning

Columbia University Center for Teaching and Learning

Overview
Episodes

Details

Dead Ideas in Teaching and Learning is a podcast from the Columbia University Center for Teaching and Learning. Our mission is to encourage instructors, students, and leaders in higher education to reflect on what they believe about teaching and learning.

Recent Episodes

Are Students Knowledge Consumers or Co-Producers? A discussion on academic co-creation with Robert Gray
NOV 6, 2025
Are Students Knowledge Consumers or Co-Producers? A discussion on academic co-creation with Robert Gray
In this episode, we sit down with Dr. Robert Gray, Associate Professor of University Pedagogy at the University of Bergen in Norway, to explore a fundamental question about the purpose of higher education: should learning be an act of consumption or production? Maybe the best learning experiences don't simply ask students to absorb information—they invite students to actively re-write and co-create knowledge with the teacher.Dr. Gray's research draws on Roland Barthes' concepts of "readerly" and "writerly" texts, arguing that valuable learning happens when students are encouraged to "re-write" their classroom materials and become active producers of meaning. We discuss how students bring diverse perspectives and contexts to shared texts and lectures, creating something new and innovative from the materials we provide. As educators, we are challenged to foster an active, collaborative campus culture where learning becomes genuinely additive and co-creative.Learn more about Dr. Gray’s research in his article: “Learning Is [Like] an Act of Writing: The Writerly Turn in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391383875_Learning_Is_Like_an_Act_of_Writing_The_Writerly_Turn_in_Teaching_and_Learning_in_Higher_Education)”Other materials referenced in this episode include:Barthes, R. (1975). The pleasure of the text (https://www.amazon.com/Pleasure-Text-Roland-Barthes/dp/0374521603)(R. Miller, Trans.). Hill and Wang. (Original work published 1973).
play-circle icon
25 MIN
“Constitutively Irresponsible”: Why Students Can't Be GenAI's Quality Control. A conversation with Gene Flenady and Robert Sparrow.
OCT 23, 2025
“Constitutively Irresponsible”: Why Students Can't Be GenAI's Quality Control. A conversation with Gene Flenady and Robert Sparrow.
This week, we have two guests on the podcast. We’re joined by Gene Flenady, Lecturer in Philosophy at Monash University, whose research concerns the structure and social conditions of human rational agency, including the implications of new technologies for meaningful work and tertiary pedagogy. Our second guest is Robert Sparrow, Professor of Philosophy at Monash University. His research interests include political philosophy and the ethics of science and technology with an eye towards real-world applications. Flenady and Sparrow argue that GenAI systems are "constitutively irresponsible" because their algorithms are designed to predict what "sounds good" - not necessarily what is true or contextually appropriate. Our guests suggest that it's unfair to expect learners themselves to determine when AI is wrong or misleading. Doing so puts students in an impossible position and gets in the way of building meaningful relationships with their human teachers and the pursuit of lifelong learning. Learn more about Drs. Flenady and Sparrow’s work in their article: “Cut the bullshit: why GenAI systems are neither collaborators nor tutors (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13562517.2025.2497263)”Other materials referenced in this episode include:Frankfurt, H. G. (2005). On bullshit (https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691276786/on-bullshit). Princeton University Press.
play-circle icon
24 MIN