The modern age of technology has brought with it a substantial supply of generative artificial intelligence, a tool with which students and educators alike are very well-acquainted. According to the Pew Research Center, 79% of people in the U.S. have reported interacting with AI tools consistently, utilizing them several times a day over the past year. Furthermore, McKinsey reports that 78% of organizations are now integrating AI into their daily operations. 

It is no surprise that generative AI has found its way into our academic institutions. Without a doubt, we see a much higher engagement with these tools in the classroom today at San Diego State University than ever before. The extent to which it is integrated into our course curricula continues to prove to be inconsistent, however, and attitudes towards these tools vary from classroom to classroom.

So, we pose the question: “Why do some SDSU professors welcome AI, while others continue to avoid it?”

A number of faculty members have taken to formally introducing these technologies into their respective learning environments. 

Sam Kobari, a professor of anthropology under the College of Arts and Letters, shared that several assignments in his classroom, many of which are centered around brainstorming activities and the formulation of outlines for writing assignments, utilize generative AI. 

Kobari highlighted the potential benefits that these exercises can offer to students as they move forward both in their studies and in their careers. 

“There are a lot of jobs now that are seeing the benefits of AI as a tool,” Kobari said. “So understanding how to use this tool will make students … more well-suited to enter the job market.”

Justin Bissell, a professor in the Department of Geography, offered similar insights. 

“I require AI use on every assignment, and I require AI use on the final exam,” Bissell said. “The reason I do this is because AI is basically going to be a required skill for almost every profession going forward.”

Bissell later emphasized that the success of AI in the classroom is particularly contingent on its utilization. In his courses, AI tools are paired with practicums, meaning students are still required to understand and apply course concepts when they complete class assignments. 

“It is an advancement in the capacity of my field, but it is not necessarily something that could be implemented in the same way in a different field,” Bissell said. 

Similar sentiments have been expressed by faculty members in separate departments. 

Professor of political science, Farid Abdel-Nour, Ph.D., highlighted that generative AI has a less obvious role in his realm of academia. 

“I have not yet found a good way of using generative AI for these activities that include interpreting texts directly,” Abdel-Nour said. 

Abdel-Nour described the content of his course as being heavily centered around text analysis and critical thinking. He stressed that he is not at all opposed to the use of AI in the classroom and can certainly see how it may yield educational benefits in other fields, but has found no compelling argument for how it would aid students in his own teaching environment. 

“Right now, I am much more interested in making sure that my students are not deprived of the practices that encourage them to think directly in a sustained way,” Abdel-Nour said. 

On a broader scale, questions have been raised regarding the ethical concerns surrounding generative technology. Kobari commented on the strategies that SDSU has put in place to mitigate these drawbacks. 

“When you use AI as a general public, whatever inquiry you put into that AI then becomes game for it to use for training and part of its model,” Kobari explained. 

SDSU, in its partnership with certain AI companies, has established a closed AI system that eliminates this procedure. 

Of course, detecting whether or not a student is submitting original written work is a hurdle that has yet to be fully conquered. According to Kobari, SDSU faculty members continue to wonder how institutions can implement foolproof provisions to limit student reliance on AI for writing assignments. 

In truth, the role that AI plays in the education system will always be a topic of deliberation. As students of the digital age, we have witnessed firsthand the advantages and disadvantages of formally introducing these tools into our curricula. It is likely that as technology continues to advance, our conversations and the makeup of our academic environments will follow suit.