The Bridge: a Disagreeing Well podcast

Is AI destroying education? With Dan Fitzpatrick and John Warner

Is the rise of Generative AI a genuine threat to how we learn, or simply the next tool in the educational shed? While it is certainly changing the conversation in staffrooms and lecture halls, there is a lot of nuances to uncover between the headlines and the reality of the classroom.    This episode of The Bridge: A Disagreeing Well Podcast from University College London and Students' Union UCL looks at the tension between the convenience of AI and the "productive struggle" of traditional learning. We explore whether we are at risk of losing something essential in our pursuit of efficiency.    UCL student host Diego Lacheze-Beer facilitates a thoughtful discussion between two experts who, despite their different starting points, find some surprising areas of alignment:  * Dan Fitzpatrick, educational strategist and author of The AI Classroom, sees AI as a supportive partner that can help manage the heavy lifting for teachers and provide students with a personalised way to engage with complex ideas. He argues that we should focus on how these tools can be used to augment human potential rather than replace it.  * John Warner, writer and author of More Than Words, is more cautious about the "frictionless" nature of AI. He suggests that the effort required to write and think for oneself is where the actual education happens, and he worries that outsourcing this work to an algorithm might devalue the human experience of discovery.  Our resident UCL expert mediator, Dr. Melanie Garson, helped the guests move beyond a simple pro or anti debate. She used the technique of identifying underlying fears and "drivers" to open up the conversation. By doing so, she helped the guests move from debating the technology itself to discussing the bigger picture: how the education system operates in a world permeated by AI and whether our current models of schooling are still meeting the current and future needs of students.    Key takeaways from this episode:  * Identify the "Driver": Melanie highlighted that our stances are often driven by personal roles - such as Dan’s perspective as a parent wanting his children to be ready for the future, versus John’s focus on protecting the creative process.  * Look for Systemic Agreement: Often, a disagreement about a new tool is actually a shared frustration with an old system. Both guests agreed that the current "transactional" model of schooling often prioritises grades over actual learning.  * Value the "Friction": In a world that prizes speed, there is a case for "disagreeing well" by defending the slow, difficult parts of learning that lead to genuine human insight and self-formation.  Listen now to hear how we can find a sensible path forward for AI in education.    This production was led by UCL student presenters, Diego Lacheze-Beer and Marva Khalid, who are participants on Students’ Union UCL’s Impartial Chairs Programme. Find out more about the programme and, if you are a UCL student, how you can apply here [https://studentsunionucl.org/impartial-chairs-programme].     This is a Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/] production.     Episode Credits  Presenter: Diego Lacheze-Beer, Students’ Union UCL Impartial Chair  Guests: Dan Fitzpatrick [https://www.theaieducator.io/] and John Warner [https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-warner-8a5a0a64/]  Producer and editor: Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/]  Music: The Investigation by Pixabay   Artwork: Johnson Banks and Indianna Dimmer    Further reading and resources   * Fitzpatrick, D., (2025), Infinite Education: The Four-Step Strategy for Leading Change in the Age of Artificial Intelligence  * Fitzpatrick, D., (2025), The AI Classroom: The Ultimate Guide to Artificial Intelligence in Education  * Fitzpatrick, D., (2025), The Educators’ AI Guide 2026  * Stephenson, R., and Armstrong, C., (12th March 2026) “Student Generative Artifical Intelligence Survey 2026” [https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/HEPI-Report-199-Gen-AI-Survey-2026.pdf], Higher Education Policy Institute  *  Warner, J., (2025), More Than Words: How to Think About Writing in the Age of AI

Should the UK cap international student numbers? With Jamie Arrowsmith and Jonathan Thomas

In this episode of The Bridge: A Disagreeing Well Podcast, we tackle a question at the heart of the UK's identity as a global education leader. While the debate often focuses on migration statistics, the human element is frequently lost: the fact that international students are a vital part of the UK’s academic and social fabric.     As the UK navigates new immigration frameworks, we ask: how can the country maintain its reputation as a welcoming destination while ensuring growth is sustainable for local communities?     In this discussion from University College London and Students’ Union UCL, host and co-producer Marva Khalid facilitates a nuanced conversation where both guests agree that international students are welcome and bring immense value to the UK. However, they disagree fundamentally on whether a cap is the right tool to manage that value:     * Jamie Arrowsmith, Director at Universities UK International, argues that caps are "blunt tools" used by governments that lack better ideas. He contends that international recruitment is already naturally falling and that adding a cap would be a "disastrous" signal that harms the UK’s reputation and ignores the existing controls already in place.   * Jonathan Thomas, Senior Fellow at the Social Market Foundation, believes that because students are so "welcome and important," we must ensure their arrival serves the interests of local communities and infrastructure. He argues that while a general cap is difficult, specific controls or caps in certain circumstances are necessary to manage "externalities" like housing shortages and public perception.   Key Takeaways from this Episode:  * Don’t Solve "Yesterday’s Problems": Jamie highlights that international student numbers are already in reverse; he argues that imposing a cap now would be a reactive mistake to a trend that has already shifted.   * The "Social License" to Practice: The guests explore whether universities have lost public trust by growing too fast. Jonathan suggests that "aggressive" advocacy from the sector has sometimes ignored legitimate local concerns about housing and infrastructure.   * Lessons from Abroad: Both guests look at the "unintended consequences" seen in Canada and Australia. While they agree these examples show that caps can be "too effective" at killing recruitment, they disagree on whether the UK can find a more "nuanced" version of these controls.   * Identifying Common Solutions: Despite their disagreement on caps, both guests find common ground in the need for a "compact" - a better partnership between universities, government, and local residents to manage growth sustainably.   * The Power of Curiosity: The guests reflect on the importance of approaching "hotly debated" topics with a desire to understand the other’s "strategy source" rather than simply needing to "win."     Listen now to hear how we can bridge the divide and ensure the UK remains a top-tier, welcoming home for international students.     This production was led by UCL student presenters, Diego Lacheze-Beer and Marva Khalid, who are participants on Students’ Union UCL’s Impartial Chairs Programme. Find out more about the programme and, if you are a UCL student, how you can apply here [https://studentsunionucl.org/impartial-chairs-programme].     This is a Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/] production.     Episode Credits  Presenter: Marva Khalid Students’ Union UCL Impartial Chair  Guests:  Jamie Arrowsmith [https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/about-us/people/jamie-arrowsmith] and Jonathan Thomas [https://www.smf.co.uk/people/jonathan-thomas/]  Producer and editor: Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/]  Music: The Investigation by Pixabay   Artwork: Johnson Banks and Indianna Dimmer    Further reading and resources     * Universities UK International [https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/topics/international]  * Social Market Foundation [https://www.smf.co.uk/]   * Dolen, Z. (2024) Too much of a good thing? International students and the financial stability of English higher education [https://www.smf.co.uk/publications/university-funding-graduate-visa/]  * Thomas, J. (2024) Crazy for you: What just happened, and where next, for the UK's switchback policy on international students? [https://www.smf.co.uk/publications/international-students-politics-uk/]

Does Populism threaten democracy? With Marc Froese and Frank Furedi

Is populism a vital expression of democracy in action, or a method used to undermine it from within? Writing in 1999, political theorist Margaret Canovan described populism as the "shadow of democracy" - an ever-present reflection of the system's own internal tensions. In this episode of The Bridge: A Disagreeing Well Podcast from University College London and Students' Union UCL, we explore how that shadow has lengthened in the decades since. We ask whether modern populism is the inevitable result of a democracy that has stopped listening to its citizens, and whether the real threat comes from these grassroots movements or the "anti-populists" who seek to restrain them.  UCL student host Marva Khalid facilitates a deep dive between two experts with opposing viewpoints who find unexpected common ground on the importance of free debate:  * Marc Froese, Professor of Political Science and author of Has Populism Won the War on Liberal Democracy?, views populism as a powerful method of message framing. He argues that while it can rally people against threats, it is often used by elites to create polarisation and insecurity to drive specific electoral outcomes.  * Frank Furedi, Emeritus Professor of Sociology and author of In Defence of Populism, sees populism as an essential driver of democratic rights that "comes from below". He suggests that "anti-populists" are the true threat to democracy, as they question the moral capacity of citizens to make their own decisions.  Our resident UCL expert mediator, Dr Melanie Garson, helped the guests navigate beyond their publicly stated academic positions. By encouraging them to share personal experiences and ask each other non-topic-related questions, she created space for a "grown-up discussion" that moved past standard political caricatures.  Key Takeaways from this Episode:  * Humanise the Opponent: Melanie used "off-topic" questions - asking about retirement or past research - to break down academic barriers and establish a personal connection before tackling the main disagreement.  * Identify the "Double Standard": The guests explored how populist movements are often judged more harshly than liberal or conservative ones, with any mistake seen as a defining feature rather than a simple error.  * Value the Friction of Debate: Both guests lamented the rise of "bubbles" and self-censorship. They agreed that true education and democracy require the "tension of disagreeing well" - the ability to hold strong, even unpopular opinions while remaining open to learning from opponents.  * Question the Label: A significant part of the disagreement stems from the fact that "populist" is rarely a self-chosen title; it is often a term of "pathologisation" used by critics to label movements they dislike.  Listen now to hear how we can bridge the divide and protect democracy in an age of intense political polarisation.  This production was led by UCL student presenters, Diego Lacheze-Beer and Marva Khalid, who are participants on Students’ Union UCL’s Impartial Chairs Programme. Find out more about the programme and, if you are a UCL student, how you can apply here [https://studentsunionucl.org/impartial-chairs-programme].     This is a Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/] production.     Episode Credits  Presenter:  Marva Khalid Students’ Union UCL Impartial Chair  Guests:  Marc Froese [https://www.burmanu.ca/directory/marc-froese] and Frank Furedi [https://www.kent.ac.uk/school-of-social-sciences/people/1988/furedi-frank]  Producer and editor: Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/]  Music: The Investigation by Pixabay   Artwork: Johnson Banks and Indianna Dimmer    Further reading and resources   * Canovan, M. (1999), ‘Trust the People! Populism and the Two Faces of Democracy’, Political Studies, 47(1), pp. 2–16.  * Drache, D., and Froese, M. (2022) Has Populism Won? The War on Liberal Democracy  * Furedi, F. (2026), In Defence of Populism  * Furedi, F. (2024) The war on the past  * Mouffe, C. (2018) For a left populism  * Mudde, C. (2004) ‘The populist zeitgeist’, Government and Opposition, 39(4), pp. 541–563

The Bridge Series 2 Trailer with Diego Lacheze-Beer and Marva Khalid

How good are you at discussing, debating and disagreeing with people who hold different views to your own? Are you tired of hearing the same well-rehearsed arguments on an important issue without also hearing those involved seek any understanding of their opponent's perspective.  The fact is, if we want to get along better, coexist as communities and find solutions to the challenges we face, we need to learn to disagree better.  I'm Diego Lacheze-Beer and I'm Marva Khalid. We're both University College London students and co-producers of the second series of The Bridge; A Disagreeing Well podcast from UCL and Students' Union UCL.  As you'll know if you've listened to series one, The Bridge tackles hotly debated issues of our time and seeks to provide us with the tools and techniques to disagree about them better.  In series two, we'll be asking more tough questions, including: does the UK do enough for asylum seekers? Does populism threaten democracy? And 10 years on from Brexit, is it time Britain rejoined the EU?  We'll be discussing these and more with the help of UCL based conflict resolution expert, Dr Melanie Garson, who will mediate between our guests using tried and tested communication techniques to find common ground.  We need to have tough debates, but we need to do so in a way that builds mutual respect, not further division. So if you're interested in learning how to disagree better and build consensus, not conflict, make sure you listen to Series 2 of The Bridge.  Episodes will be published weekly from 7th May and will be available wherever you receive your podcasts.   This production was led by UCL student presenters, Diego Lacheze-Beer and Marva Khalid, who are participants on Students’ Union UCL’s Impartial Chairs Programme. Find out more about the programme and, if you are a UCL student, how you can apply here [https://studentsunionucl.org/impartial-chairs-programme].     This is a Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/] production.     Episode Credits  Presenter:  Diego Lacheze-Beer and Marva Khalid Students’ Union UCL Impartial Chair  Producer and editor: Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/]  Music: The Investigation by Pixabay   Artwork: Johnson Banks and Indianna Dimmer

Should we ban social media for children? With Daniel Angus and Jennifer Powers

Is a blanket social media ban for children the best way to mitigate its harmful impact?  Join host Lea Hofer in the inaugural episode of Disagreeing Well, the podcast from University College London and Students' Union UCL that equips you with tools and techniques to navigate challenging conversations. This episode dives into the hotly debated question of a blanket social media ban for children.  We hear from two guests with sharply contrasting views:  * Professor Daniel Angus from the Queensland University of Technology, who argues a social media ban is a "blunt instrument" that won't address the root causes of issues like cyberbullying or body image concerns and could even exacerbate them. His research emphasises a nuanced, evidence-based approach to digital media and society.  * Jennifer Powers, founder of the Unplugged Coalition, who believes a social media ban for under 16s is a crucial step to protect children from the "addictive by design" nature of platforms and their proven negative impacts on mental health and educational attainment. She highlights a growing parental movement calling for stricter boundaries on internet-enabled devices.  UCL's resident expert mediator, Dr. Melanie Garson, guides the discussion, helping to unpack the underlying anxieties and different perspectives on children's agency and responsibility in the digital world. The episode concludes with reflections on the mediation techniques used and tips for disagreeing better. Key takeaways from this episode:  * Understanding diverse perspectives: Explore the complex arguments for and against a social media ban, rooted in different research, experiences, and concerns.  * The role of emotion in debate: Discover how underlying anxieties and emotions can influence how we approach difficult topics and our ability to find common ground.  * Techniques for constructive disagreement: Learn about the "stepping back" technique used by our mediator to encourage a broader view of the problem and identify shared goals, even amidst strong disagreements.  Tune in to gain insights into this critical debate and equip yourself with the skills to engage in more fruitful conversations. This production was led by our student presenters, Lea Hofer and Tara Constantine, who are participants on Students’ Union UCL’s Impartial Chairs Programme. Find out more about the programme and how to apply if you are a student - visit Impartial Chairs Programme [https://studentsunionucl.org/impartial-chairs-programme]. This is a Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/] production for UCL.  Episode Credits Presenter:  Lea Hofer, UCL Impartial Chair Guests: Daniel Angus [https://www.qut.edu.au/about/our-people/academic-profiles/daniel.angus] and Jennifer Powers [https://www.linkedin.com/in/jennifer-powers-01296928/?originalSubdomain=uk] Producer and editor: Research Podcasts [https://researchpodcasts.co.uk/] Music: The Investigation by Pixabay Artwork:  Mayuko Yamaguchi, UCL undergraduate student   Further reading and resources    Demystifying the Teen Social Media ban resources [https://research.qut.edu.au/dmrc/demystifying-the-teen-social-media-ban/] from QUT Digital Media Research Centre. Dezuanni, M. et al (2023) “Digital Child Working Paper 2023-11, Manifesto for a Better Children’s Internet” [https://digitalchild.org.au/research/publications/working-paper/manifesto-for-a-better-childrens-internet/], Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Queensland University of Technology. Haidt, J., (2024) The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness.  Unplugged Coalition [https://unpluggedcoalition.com/], unites people and organizations committed to protecting childhood from addictive technology.