What happened
Faculty Focus published a July 31, 2026 article by Lydia Elliott, EdD, arguing that generative AI is exposing a gap between correct academic output and student understanding. Elliott writes that large language models can generate essays, summaries, explanations, and structured problem-solving, so educators may be “evaluating the tool rather than the learner.”
Why it matters
The practical issue is assessment validity. The article says traditional products such as essays, quizzes, discussion posts, and standardized responses often assumed the learner did the thinking. Citing Perkins et al. and Mollick & Mollick, Elliott says AI-generated writing can make static submissions less reliable evidence of individual cognition, especially in professional education where judgment under uncertainty matters.
What to do next
Review high-stakes tasks for whether they require interpretation, reasoning, and justification, not only polished answers. Consider pilots using oral explanations, scenario-based work, reflective reasoning assignments, and feedback conversations, which the article attributes to recommendations in AI-supported education scholarship. Keep uncertainty visible: these changes do not remove AI use, and the article frames traditional assignments as insufficient alone, not useless.
About this briefing
Reviewed by TutorFlow Editorial. We link the primary source, preserve its publication date, and distinguish reported claims from TutorFlow analysis. Our commentary focuses on practical decisions for educators and training teams.
Discussion (0)
Open to everyone