From drafting essays to reshaping lesson plans, generative artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly changing academic life at universities across the country, including Emory University. As AI becomes more integrated into higher education, faculty and students are reevaluating what meaningful learning and responsible use of AI looks like in the classroom.
Ju Zhang, a visiting assistant professor at the Human Health Research Center, said that when ChatGPT first entered the academic field, he noticed a change in the way students learned.
“That’s when I started thinking about how education should change, because education is a new way to obtain knowledge,” Chan said. “For me, this is certainly an opportunity, but it also comes with a lot of risks.”
For Zhang, the advent of AI has led to a focus on personal interaction in the classroom, rather than disseminating the “abstract knowledge” that students can acquire through AI platforms. Although Chan does not allow the use of AI in classes, he said that AI must be used responsibly and ethically in the classroom.
“If you just give [instructors] AI-generated junk that doesn’t reflect your own learning is unfair to instructors and professors, and it’s also unfair to other students. Because it gives them an unfair advantage over other honest students,” Chan said.
Emory faculty and students have explored the impact of AI through programs such as the AI.Humanity Initiative, which brings faculty together to discuss the impact of AI on various academic disciplines and how it can be leveraged. This effort includes the Center for AI Learning, which launched in September 2023 and is focused on building AI literacy and providing opportunities for community members to take advantage of these tools.
Chloe Winograd (26Ox) said she avoids using AI due to environmental concerns associated with the energy and water demands of large data centers. The use of AI is predicted to generate 24 million to 44 million tons of carbon dioxide and consume 731 million to 1,125 million cubic meters of water annually by 2030.
“I don’t think anyone is perfect when it comes to the environment,” Winograd said. “If it’s something that’s harmful to the environment and I think, ‘I don’t have to do this,’ then I try to avoid it as much as possible.”
Winograd said that despite his personal beliefs, he acknowledges that different academic pursuits may justify different levels of AI use.
“I also know that I’m primarily in a humanities or philosophy-style class, so even if I used it there it wouldn’t be as useful as it would be in a class like data science,” Winograd said. “I know people are hearing that there are classes where professors ask them to use AI.”
Ariel Xu (26Ox) similarly mentioned how some professors are asking students to use AI, noting that she herself uses AI for error checking and structural advice.
“I’ve taken courses where professors actually allow you to use AI for assignment purposes, so they can give you prompts and help you generate a structure for writing a proposal,” Xu said. “You still have to paste the entire conversation in chat.” [GPT] That way he could also check and see how our conversation would go. ”
Xu said there will also be unavoidable interactions with AI across search engines.
“Even if you don’t use ChatGPT, [Google] In the Cloud Search bar, much of what you type on the internet is used by AI, so it can be counted as an interaction with AI,” Xu said.
Xu said he primarily uses AI to improve structure and check for errors, rather than completing the entire assignment. She said she believes enforcing a complete ban on AI may not be realistic and that the technology will always focus on efficiency rather than true creativity.
Still, Winograd said concerns about equity and academic pressure were still part of the conversation, but they did not define her AI-free academic experience.
“It might take more time to study for a test, it might take more time to write an essay,” Winograd said. “From my personal experience, I don’t think there’s anyone who says, ‘Oh my gosh, we can use AI, we absolutely have to use it,’ but I’ve never felt like I’m behind the curve.”
Mr. Xu also expressed concern about the biases present in many AI models, emphasizing that these technologies are not as neutral or objective as they appear.
“Although it’s very useful and gives us many answers to what we’re looking for, it’s still a biased search system because of the information that’s entered when it’s built,” Xu says. “I’ve seen places where there are sexist and racist comments. There’s definitely room for improvement.”
The Emory Wheel encourages reader feedback and dialogue. Please rate this article and continue the discussion on social media.
