🔗 Share this article Pupils Protest Over AI-Taught College Course: "We Students Could Have Just Used ChatGPT" Several students at a British college voiced deep dissatisfaction when finding out their digital module was predominantly delivered through AI. Career Change Hopes Dashed One student and another participant were among 41 participants who started a coding course aiming to move into software engineering through a publicly-supported development program. However their expectations were soon diminished when they encountered computer-created slides being presented by an computer-generated narration. When we submitted work that was produced artificially, we could be kicked out from the institution,” said the student during a documented discussion with his instructor. Multiple Complaints and Institutional Reaction Learners multiple times brought up concerns about the computer-generated resources, however the college seems to have continued using automated content. Curiously, the university maintains strict policies limiting pupil use of AI, saying that submitting AI-generated work equals policy breach. Expanding Trend in Higher Education The scenario mirrors a larger movement across universities increasingly using AI tools for teaching, content creation, and customized evaluation. Modern surveys suggest nearly a quarter of UK educators now use AI in their educational practices Government reports have celebrated generative AI's ability to change education However many learners find the situation demoralizing rather than innovative Telltale Indications of Computer Production Participants observed various signs indicating automated materials: Inconsistent language usage between US and British English Unusual file labels Basic information with sometimes mentions to irrelevant US legislation Narration abruptly changing to a Spanish accent before reverting Learner Frustration and Future Anxieties One student voiced deep worry about his professional prospects, saying he felt “stuck with this course” after investing significant time. Another participant, going through a professional transition, said he had opted for the course for meaningful knowledge rather than merely a credential. “Sitting there with content that is just unworthy of anyone's time,” he stated, “while you could be spending that time genuinely interacting with something valuable, is truly discouraging.” In spite of institutional claims about preserving educational quality, learners felt the concluding inclusion of actual instructors was “too little, too late” to resolve their basic concerns.