As university people, we should take an interest in which skills, academic practices, and human relationships are too valuable to be replaced by technology, while also being willing to use it where it teaches us something and where it can enhance the quality of what we do, writes Arts Dean Maja Horst in her column.

It is problematic that the university now offers all students software that can read course texts aloud to them. Because we risk weakening students' reading skills and undermining intellectual development. Reading a text and writing an assignment should be challenging, writes Anders Schmidt Vinther, teaching associate professor at the Department of Public Health.

History student Asger Stavsholm Tonsberg feels his supplementary subject in German leaves too little room for critical engagement with the syllabus. Many of us will go on to become upper secondary school teachers, which is precisely why this is so concerning. A teacher who has never been taught to challenge a narrative critically will struggle to pass that skill on to their pupils, he writes.

In education, we often use static products such as written exams as evidence of a dynamic learning process. But it is time to rethink assessment in a way that makes the process more visible, suggests Prajakt Pande, Associate Professor at the Centre for Educational Development.

We talk about technology and innovation as though a scientific finding published in a journal somehow magically turns into a production line in Brande or Bjerringbro. It doesn't. Production technology should be prioritised as a critical technology alongside artificial intelligence and cybersecurity, writes the Dean of the Faculty of Technical Sciences in this column.

Aarhus University owes it to new generations of students to clarify how AI should not be used in learning, as this is a challenge that upper secondary schools have been unable to meet. If AI is to be used responsibly tomorrow, we need to help students today - and we should have started yesterday, writes medical student Jens Vase.

How do we prevent our students, the former upper-secondary pupils, from taking the GAI shortcut, bypassing the hard work of learning and leaving our programmes with artificial (intelligent) competencies that can be switched off at the flick of a switch? asks Associate Professor Mikkel H. S. Marqvorsen, who is calling for action from both the senior management team and the Centre for Educational Development (CED).

Students and alumni at Cognitive Science urge the Senior Management Team to reopen the decision to convert the Bachelor’s programme in Cognitive Science to Danish. Why should Arts be left without an English-taught Bachelor's programme while new ones have just opened elsewhere at the university, they ask.

Perhaps our most important task should not, first and foremost, be to communicate the latest knowledge. Perhaps it should be teaching people to understand how knowledge is created in the first place, writes Professor Morten Storm Overgaard in his column.

There is neither much 'wise' nor 'flow' about the process of entering grades into the exam system WISEflow. But nothing unites people quite like a common enemy, writes Associate Professor Peter Bakker.