Professors begin to add artificial intelligence policies to class syllabi

As the one-year anniversary of ChatGPT’s release into everyday life nears, students and professors alike are wondering what role artificial intelligence will play in academia.

In line with the views of universities across the nation, CSB+SJU faculty share concerns that AI may prevent students from developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills, as well as detract from their learning.

However, the conversation around AI does not stop at prohibiting its use.

Faculty were given the opportunity to discuss artificial intelligence use and its policies at the beginning of the academic year through an all-faculty workshop conducted by the Center for Teaching.

Director Laura Taylor, a CSB+SJU theology professor, helped to run this session. While generative AI is alluded to in the university’s plagiarism policy, there are no specific rules around general use of AI.

During the session, Taylor discussed the importance of faculty creating a syllabi policy for AI because faculty across campus hold varying opinions about whether AI should or should not be used and how students should utilize it.

It seems that many faculty members are accepting that AI might have a new place in classrooms, albeit with constraints.

“My sense about faculty from my conversations with them is that most faculty are falling in this limited [use policy]; you can use it when I give you permission in this explicit way, and when you do, you should cite that you use it,” Taylor said.

Philosophy professor Erica Stonestreet falls somewhere in the middle ground on artificial intelligence use. She noted that AI is a tool that can be used to enhance learning but is not a substitute.

“I emphasize that the point of me asking people to do any work is for them to learn,” Stonestreet said. “I really talk to students [and say,] ‘Everything I have you do has a purpose, and it’s hooked to your learning. If you’re not doing the work yourself, then you’re not going to learn.’”

Stonestreet allows AI use on assignments, but only if students include an appendix on which tool they used, what they did, why they used it and how it helped them with their learning.

Stonestreet also incorporates explicit AI use into her classes, allowing students to enlist a bot to write their paper and examine the outcome. Interestingly, students found that AI is not as useful in writing a paper as it may seem. Stonestreet and Taylor noted that while an AI like ChatGPT is capable of writing an essay, the results are lacking compared to a well written, thoughtful paper from a student.

Chloe Terpstra, CSB junior and communication major, says that while AI may be used in dishonest ways, it can be a usefultool.

“It’s a good stepping point for getting quotes or pulling important information. Sometimes if I don’t understand a homework assignment, I’ll plug it in to understand key points. I use it more as a resource and a base,” Terpstra said.

Some students find themselves under the instruction of professors who are enthusiastic fans of AI.

CSB senior and computer science major Keiley Maahs is engaging in AI-assisted research for her capstone course. She stated that her professor takes the stance that AI is only helpful to students, and that learning about it lends one a competitive edge.

“It does change the whole education process,” Maahs said. “There is not as much critical thinking, but it can be helpful for things like grammar or organization.”

Cheating is always a concern for professors, and AI may make that easier. Nonetheless, Stonestreet said, cheating has always been an issue, and much of it flies under the radar. She believes that instances of cheating are not vastly more prominent now than they were before AI became common place.

“I am, however, a bit of an optimist,” she said.