Guest User
“Here I Am”: Reclaiming Moral Presence in a ...

Written by: Gila Hammer Furnes

Abstract: In a culture where children witness cruelty, grief, and injustice on their screens before breakfast—often without an adult to hold what they have seen—this essay reclaims moral presence as a pedagogical condition. Drawing on Lévinas, Buber, Todd, Biesta, and Ellsworth, it introduces Hineni—the Hebrew phrase meaning “Here I am”—as an ethical stance of availability that precedes instruction, autonomy, or deliberation. In contrast to dominant models of moral development that locate ethics in reason, regulation, or curriculum, Hineni reconfigures the child not as a future ethical subject, but as one already present in their trembling response to the world. Situated at the intersection of digital culture, ethical phenomenology, and critical pedagogy, the essay resists calls for digital resilience and instead frames education as a space of mutual presence. It argues that pedagogy must not merely protect the child, but stay with them—in their silence, uncertainty, and proximity to harm. To teach ethically in a digital age, it suggests, is not to command response, but to echo it.

Keywords:Hineni, moral education, digital culture, ethical responsiveness, critical pedagogy

Image: "Hineni" by Howard J Duncan is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

“Here I Am”: Reclaiming Moral Presence in a Culture of Digital Noise

AI policies

“Sacks of Horseshit” or “Knowledgeable Teaching Assistants”? Exploring Perceptions of Generative AI Tools among University Students and Educators

“Sacks of Horseshit” or “Knowledgeable Teaching Assistants”? Exploring Perceptions of Generative AI Tools among University Students and Educators

Written by: Dennis Nguyen, Karin van Es & Rianne van Lambalgen.

Abstract: Exploring generative AI (GenAI) perspectives and uses among students and educators is essential for informed decision-making in higher education. Insights foster a nuanced understanding of perceptions, attitudes, and opinions shaped by specific AI imaginaries. This paper presents a case study from Utrecht University, Netherlands, using a multi-method approach to examine stakeholders’ views on GenAI. An analysis of initial policy decisions and a university-wide survey (N=1,981) highlight key issues: the widespread use of GenAI tools, the limitations of “fear-mongering” about AI, the structural challenges of contemporary educational systems (especially workload), and the need for clearer guidelines to reduce confusion. The findings contribute in two ways. First, they emphasize the importance of empirical research into stakeholder practices to counter AI hype and inform realistic policy. Second, they provide actionable recommendations to address the social, technological, and structural challenges GenAI poses, fostering informed and inclusive policymaking at universities. We identify here the fallacy of perceived AI effects as an important factor leading to one-dimensional AI governance approaches.

Keywords: GenAI, Higher Education, AI Policies, Sociotechnical Imaginaries