Price Lab for Digital Humanities recently published a white paper on using artificial intelligence in the classroom.
The paper, titled “High Standards for Critical Reading, Writing, and Research in the Age of AI,” was published in December 2025 and outlines concerns about the growing role of AI in academia. The paper, written by the Critical Approaches to AI Working Group, warns that this development raises questions about the future of critical thinking and student skills development.
Stewart Varner, Managing Director of Price Labs, and JD Porter, Associate Director of Humanities Digital Research, launched this group of faculty and researchers from a variety of disciplines in 2025.
In an interview with the Daily Pennsylvanian, Berner explained that the group originally wanted to understand how these technologies worked and share their findings so people could “make smarter decisions about how they wanted to use them” in the classroom.
The white paper argues that the spread of generative AI has made it difficult to evaluate student learning, leading to a “shallowing of knowledge” and “atrophy of skills.”
Digital Humanities Professor Emily Hammer said: “We are at risk of losing foundational skills that will harm students individually, personally and professionally.”
She added that the impact could be felt by Penn and “broader society.”
The paper also outlines recommendations for how universities can respond, including establishing clear guidance on the appropriate use of generative AI in the classroom.
Kelly McAuliffe, ABD PhD candidate in the Department of English and lecturer in the School of Social Policy and Practice, told DP that the working group proposed a policy framework that would help create “guardrails around the use of AI.”
“There is an example of a traffic light system,” McAuliffe said, explaining that a “green light course” would allow widespread use of AI, while a “red light course” would prohibit the use of AI.
Other Members emphasized the need for broader institutional action.
Porter explained that humanities teachers are grappling with what he called the “persistent and growing problem” of teaching critical reading, writing, and research skills in the age of AI.
“Using AI to summarize the same work is, at best, like asking your roommate for the content,” the paper says. “Having ChatGPT write a response is like copying your roommate’s work.”
Porter said the responsibility to prevent such use now “lies with specific instructors and students.”
“We don’t think that’s really possible,” he added.
The paper emphasized that the importance of reading and writing is not limited to the humanities. Rather, these are “essential skills regardless of the field of application.”
Porter suggested that solutions “need to come from outside the specific classroom,” calling for university-level policies that mandate AI-free classes and provide clearer institutional support.
“We want to encourage instructors to think about how this technology will be used in the classroom and how it will help or hinder the achievement of the learning goals of the class,” Berner said. “We’re trying to provide resources for instructors.”
