3/3. Why learn in this day and age?
This question sparked cross-disciplinary discussions among partners of the UNOE network. Here is the contribution from Fawzi Baroud, the professor accompanying the Lebanese student group at Notre Dame University- Louaize.
AI and Learning: A Cross-Cultural Student Debate
In an era where artificial intelligence continues to reshape our academic landscape, a fundamental question emerges: “Now that AI works so well… do we still need to learn?” This provocative inquiry formed the centerpiece of a recent cross-cultural academic exchange between French students at Nantes University and Lebanese students at Notre Dame University- Louaize.
The Framework
The debate followed an innovative format. First, students at Nantes University engaged in an initial discussion exploring the central question. Their reflections and arguments were documented and shared with their counterparts. Armed with this preliminary discourse, the Lebanese students prepared targeted questions to deepen the conversation during a subsequent online virtual meeting.
What transpired was a rich tapestry of perspectives that crystallized around three fundamental pillars:
- socialization,
- critical thinking,
- and the pleasure of learning as identified by the French students.
Pillar 1: Socialization – Human Connections in a Digital Age
The French students emphasized the irreplaceable social dynamics of the learning process. Their position highlighted how traditional educational environments foster collaboration, cultural exchange, and interpersonal skills that AI cannot replicate.
“Learning is not just about content acquisition,” noted one Nantes student, “but about creating shared experiences and building networks that last beyond the classroom.”
The Lebanese students countered with observations about how AI-enabled learning platforms are increasingly incorporating social elements through virtual communities and collaborative tools. However, both groups eventually acknowledged that while technology may facilitate certain types of connection, the nuanced dimensions of human interaction remain essential to educational development.
Pillar 2: Critical Thinking – Beyond Algorithmic Reasoning
Perhaps the most spirited exchanges occurred around the topic of critical thinking. The French student’s analysis of AI’s limitations in this domain was particularly incisive: “Since AI is made by humans, it is not completely neutral and when we ask it questions, it selects answers according to how its algorithm has been designed. “They highlighted the challenge of AI’s non-discriminatory information gathering, noting that “the information returned by generative AIs therefore comes from both verified sources and unfounded theories.” The Lebanese students argued that in a world where information is abundant but wisdom scarce, the ability to evaluate, contextualize, and synthesize information becomes even more crucial. “AI excels at pattern recognition and data processing,” one student pointed out, “but struggles with the kind of contextual judgment and ethical reasoning that defines human intelligence.”
Interestingly, the students largely agreed that educational institutions must evolve their approaches to critical thinking instruction. They suggested that rather than competing with AI capabilities, education should complement them by focusing on uniquely human cognitive strengths.
Pillar 3: The Pleasure of Learning – Intrinsic Motivation
The discussion took a philosophical turn when addressing the inherent satisfaction of acquiring knowledge. Students from both institutions recognized that while AI might optimize efficiency in information delivery, it cannot replicate the intrinsic joy of discovery and mastery.
Interestingly, the Nantes students also acknowledged that AI itself could be a source of pleasure when properly utilized: “We realized that knowing how to use an AI by generating the right question to get the answer we wanted was also fun.” They noted AI’s potential to make learning more accessible and enjoyable, particularly for subjects students find difficult or uninteresting in traditional educational settings.
Both groups considered how assessment practices often undermine the inherent pleasure of learning, whether AI is involved or not: “The job market and the current school system present the diploma as a label guaranteeing knowledge to the employer, making it a compulsory step and an end to learning.”
Areas of Agreement
Despite their different academic and cultural backgrounds, the students found common ground on several key points:
- The future of education likely involves a hybrid approach that leverages AI for information delivery while preserving human guidance for deeper learning experiences.
- Educational success will increasingly depend on teaching students how to effectively collaborate with AI rather than compete against it. The educational approach should shift toward teaching students “how, why and, above all, when to use AI” since prohibiting its use outside school environments is unrealistic.
- The development of emotional intelligence and interpersonal skills will become even more valuable in an AI-saturated world.
Looking Forward
This cross-cultural exchange didn’t aim to resolve the central question definitively but rather to explore its complexities from multiple perspectives. What emerged was a nuanced understanding that transcends the binary framing of AI versus human learning.
The dialogue between these two student groups represents a small-scale version of larger global conversations about AI’s role in education and human development. Their exchange demonstrates the very qualities they discussed—critical thinking, meaningful socialization, and the genuine pleasure of collaborative learning—while pointing toward a more nuanced understanding of how AI and human learning might coexist and complement each other in the future.
