As artificial intelligence tools become more widely available, they are rapidly changing how students write, learn, and research. Schools across the world are struggling to determine the fine line between work assisted by AI and fully created by AI, a distinction necessary to ensure that students can learn responsibly as technology advances.
The school currently requires students to follow their teachers’ guidelines for AI use and, if it is permitted, cite use properly. Mr. Richard Davis, dean of academic life, said, “The three questions are: Is this your work? Can it be fairly assessed? Did you follow the expectations [of your teacher]?” The school’s expectations, included in the Almanac, require clear communication between students and teachers about when and how AI can be used. “Remember why you are here,” said Mr. Davis. “Hopefully it is to learn and grow: socially, musically, academically. The grade isn’t the goal, the learning is.”
While Mr. Davis acknowledged that AI has made certain kinds of assistance more accessible, he insists the process of learning remains the same. “If you want to get stronger, your brain has to do the work,” he said. He compared learning to a bench press: to get stronger, one has to increase the weight and stress the body.
Mr. Davis also added that although AI can be helpful in researching or studying, it should be used to extend the learning, not to replace it. “Experts use it best, because they already know what good work looks like,” he said. “You have to do your research first and then let it help you build on that.”
The photography program is experimenting with using AI to support student work. Rather than letting AI generate art, students are encouraged to use AI intentionally to enhance design and color choices.
It is no secret that the school has experienced an uptake of AI usage this year. Dr. Lennox Debra, instructor in English, said, “Students aren’t being given enough time to read and write. If students had more time to work on their writing, they wouldn’t make these decisions.” He added, “Student papers will always be more creative and satisfying than anything that I’ve read in AI. The best papers I’ve read were student-generated.”
Students also shared their perspectives on AI use. Henry Thomases ’28 said, “The majority of students understand the difference [between responsible and dishonest use], but it’s a time thing. They don’t want to spend as much time on that assignment.” Kelly Jin ’28 said, “Students feel they need to use AI, since several peers use it and get better grades with less time spent. There also isn’t a clear line between responsible and dishonest use of AI.”
At the end of last semester, the school sent out a survey to assess faculty opinions on AI usage for grading and in classrooms. Associate Head of School Dr. Amber Douglas reported that around 70% of faculty agreed that generative AI could be used as a tool to support teaching. Around 80% responded that faculty should play a role in guiding students to use AI appropriately.
“While there were varied responses on how freely students should use AI, the data of the survey provides a helpful starting point for developing principles and habits around the technology,” said Dr. Douglas. “Teachers want to understand what students have learned. And that’s compromised when students use AI. That relationship is the foundation of education.”
Artificial intelligence and technology will continue to influence learning for students and teachers. The boundaries of accepted use remain an ongoing discussion at the school.
