Artificial intelligence is popping up everywhere we turn. It is all over social media platforms, being covered by news outlets and it is now even popping up in our schools in more ways than one. Students have been using it in the wrong way by doing things like asking ChatGPT to write essays for them instead of putting the hard work in themselves. There are some Drew students who feel AI should not be used at all in schools, while some do see both positives and negatives to using artificial intelligence. We as the editorial board do not want AI to have a place at Drew University as a producer of student work.
On Drew’s campus, there are so many resources that students should be taking advantage of instead of AI to get help with studying or with essays. The Center for Academic Excellence and the Writing Center are both amazing resources that employ students who are experts in the classes they tutor and help write for. Significantly less students used the CAE and UWC last semester, which in turn gets the centers less budget and makes it harder for tutors and writing specialists to get paid.
Professors also have office hours for a reason; they want to help their students when they have questions and everyone should take advantage of office hours as well as the CAE and UWC. Don’t use AI when you have perfectly good resources that are of no extra cost and will ultimately help you more than any AI program ever could.
Sophomore Lauren Tucci (‘28) shared her thoughts on AI and how it is being used by students at Drew and the effects it is having on the world at large. Tucci was quite strong in her opinion: “Oh, I hate it. Well, I feel like I should be more specific. I don’t like generative AI…AI is also hurting the environment, because all the computers that generate everything are kept in these big buildings, and get really hot, and they have to use all this water to keep them cool…And also, a recent thing came out that ChatGPT donates to Trump, and funds ICE and stuff, and I don’t like it.”
While it remains unknown whether or not AI data centers are a major cause of a worldwide slide from water crisis to a state of global water bankruptcy, as was reported in January by the United Nations, there have been reports that data centers are a major threat to water scarcity and public health from publications like The Times, Al Jazeera and others.
Tucci is also correct on the current status of ChatGPT—OpenAI President Greg Brockman recently made a rather substantial contribution to MAGA Incorporated. ChatGPT also provided a resumé screening tool used by ICE. In response, a boycott has been established under the name “QuitGPT.”
Drew University’s AI usage policy does state that “You may use Artificial Intelligence resources only if an assignment clearly states that is an option or if your instructor explicitly permits it in the syllabus. In such cases, you may only use the specific tools or types of tools identified as acceptable and you must adhere to our standards for attribution, validation and transparency.” This policy clearly outlines strict parameters about using AI and the consequences of using it without professor permission.
With the AI policy being so strict towards students, professors should also be held to this standard as well. There should be a universal policy for use of AI for everyone included within Drew’s academic setting, not just one specifically directed towards students to abide by. Students and faculty should not rely on AI to curate any type of content. It stifles the creativity that should be fostered by professors and mentors in the classroom and overall academic setting of Drew. Faculty using AI sets a precedent for students and it would be unfair to not hold them to the same standards.
When asked for his input on the situation, Drew student Jacob Spotts (‘28) said, “I hate it. I think it’s the worst thing ever. I think it’s making people dumber… It’s, like, lowering brain activity because you’re not thinking, just using [AI].”
Spotts is correct on this front; a study done by researchers at MIT’s Media Lab last year found that of three different test groups writing essays (using AI, search engines and writing with no technological aid), the group using AI had the lowest engagement rate and underperformed on linguistic, behavioral and neural levels. In fact, their engagement rates steadily declined over the course of the several month-long study.
If this type of behavior in relation to use of AI has been observed in a research-setting, how do we expect college students to cope with this technology in their everyday lives? If Drew’s students begin to underperform in relation to their academic performance due to their reliance on AI, then, we can also subsequently assume that they won’t be readily able to perform well post-graduation.
From its environmental cost to the taxation of your own mind—there are hundreds of reasons to not use AI. Sure, there are a few good applications of these language learning models, but at the end of the day, AI shouldn’t have a place in the classroom in any manner.
The Lead Ed is the collective opinion of the Editorial Board
