Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share March 25, 2026 — Interview with Amanda Licastro
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
March 25, 2026 — Interview with Amanda Licastro
Today, we’re joined by Amanda Licastro, Head of Digital Scholarship Strategies and Visiting Associate Professor in English at Swarthmore College.
Amanda recently participated in one of Rick Anderson’s debates at the Researcher to Reader conference in London. This one was titled, “Resolved: AI Tools Will Provide a Net Benefit to Scholarly Communication.” Amanda took the side of opposing that statement.
In these debates, a poll is taken before the participants speak to gauge audience sentiment at the outset. Then, after the speakers exchange opening statements and responses, the poll is repeated.
Before the start of the debate, 80% of the audience believed AI would be a net benefit to scholarly communications. After a professional and well-natured presentation of facts, 52% of the audience came to believe that AI would not be a net benefit to scholarly communications.
We discuss a variety of great and relevant topics, including use of AI in colleges, the dark downsides, and fears of skill, cognitive, and information degradation, as well as tricks and techniques companies are using to force these on us or convince them of their benign value.
It’s a great conversation.
“Discoveries of the Week”
Subscribe to our podcast
Music provided by Provoke the Truth — https://provokethetruth.net/
View all episodes
By Caldera Information Solutions LLCToday, we’re joined by Amanda Licastro, Head of Digital Scholarship Strategies and Visiting Associate Professor in English at Swarthmore College.
Amanda recently participated in one of Rick Anderson’s debates at the Researcher to Reader conference in London. This one was titled, “Resolved: AI Tools Will Provide a Net Benefit to Scholarly Communication.” Amanda took the side of opposing that statement.
In these debates, a poll is taken before the participants speak to gauge audience sentiment at the outset. Then, after the speakers exchange opening statements and responses, the poll is repeated.
Before the start of the debate, 80% of the audience believed AI would be a net benefit to scholarly communications. After a professional and well-natured presentation of facts, 52% of the audience came to believe that AI would not be a net benefit to scholarly communications.
We discuss a variety of great and relevant topics, including use of AI in colleges, the dark downsides, and fears of skill, cognitive, and information degradation, as well as tricks and techniques companies are using to force these on us or convince them of their benign value.
It’s a great conversation.
“Discoveries of the Week”
Subscribe to our podcast
Music provided by Provoke the Truth — https://provokethetruth.net/