The Future of AI in Higher Education

For the last several weeks at Dartmouth, we have become embroiled in an escalating debate about the future of higher education, specifically, the role, if any, of AI in academia. There has never been a more opportune moment to consider this than the present.
I have, until recently, been relatively impressed with the approach of the Administration towards AI in academic work. The College has stood firmly on the side of embracing innovation and the realities of a changing job market, unlike so many other schools. Many respectable institutions have fallen victim to this era’s version of the 1980s calculator panic, during which many educators feared that the proliferation of calculator use would render students unable to think for themselves. This fear was unfounded. The calculator has enhanced the study of mathematics by shifting the focus of calculations from rote to conceptual thinking. The same is likely true for artificial intelligence. Inevitably, we will view initial academic resistance to technology as misguided and ill-informed. Dartmouth, for the most part, has avoided this intellectual trap. (That being said, I would not call Dartmouth’s actions towards AI up to now as perfect; the policy of leaving AI policies to the discretion of individual professors can, at best, be described as a hedging unwillingness to completely surrender to anti-AI sentiment).
Rather than go into a specific tirade concerning the most recent changes to Dartmouth’s AI policies, I will refer only vaguely to the College’s apparent willingness to now embrace what I would refer to as policies hostile to AI, a decision that is regrettable and will be, in hindsight, regarded as lacking in forethought. I would be remiss if I did not give at least some mention to the impetus for the renewed conversation about AI in academia at Dartmouth: the controversy surrounding Provost Santiago Schnell’s use of AI in his work. The outcry surrounding Schnell’s use of artificial intelligence in editorials is unfounded and is indicative of a kneejerk hostility to AI and unwillingness to consider its use with nuance. In journalism, articles ostensibly written by high-ranking academic administrators or government officials are not composed by the individuals themselves, but rather by members of their team. That acknowledgment, if made, is often buried deeply in the footnotes, and the use of the intellectual capital of others is never considered malfeasance. If there are legitimate concerns regarding Schnell’s use of AI in academic publications, then fine, but the investigation should be nuanced and the premise a cautionary tale of the limits of its usefulness, not an indictment of employing it. (Ironically, in the workplace, its use is heavily incentivized).
Given that the controversy surrounding Schnell only emerged in recent weeks, it seems likely that Dartmouth’s new direction concerning AI policy is guided at least in part by this new development. It is concerning if the controversy surrounding this singular instance is dictating the College’s policy. It is even more disappointing that a College which has garnered the reputation of being a stalwart against the direction of other institutions may now be succumbing to fears about technological advancement such that it affects the College’s policy.
The future of academia is not going to be in AI-proofing academic work. If educators want to preserve the compulsory imprint of critical thinking within students, then the solution is simple: in-person, pencil-and-paper bluebook exams. That is the endpoint, and it was my optimistic perspective that Dartmouth would arrive at that conclusion well before its peers. Amid recent indicators, however, I fear that Dartmouth may take the same roundabout wild goose chase as others are, and we too will be late to the inevitable conclusion. If, however, our administrators are able to cast off the dire predictions and make decisions based on what is inevitable and revolutionary, then we can turn the ship around. The term “Artificial Intelligence” was first coined on Dartmouth’s campus, after all. I am more than confident that we have the capacity to successfully weave it into the mission of learning.