Opinion: We need to talk about AI at Grinnell College

In the past few years, artificial intelligence (AI) use has become more prevalent in the world of education, sparking changes in professors’ syllabi and creating uncertainty for students and faculty alike. In order to provide a place where those in the Grinnell College community could discuss these changes openly, the Grinnell Listening Project hosted two dialogues focused on the use of AI at Grinnell. We felt it was important for people to talk about their personal experiences and beliefs concerning AI without fear of judgement. 

The first of the two dialogues was for students only and was meant to provide a place where students could talk honestly with each other about AI and how it was impacting their lives and time at college. We created small groups with students who used AI frequently, students who never used AI and those in between. Our student facilitators asked questions about how AI impacted their academic life, personal life and career path. The next week, we invited faculty and staff to come talk with the students. The goal was for them to listen to students’ perspectives and share their own in hopes of building understanding in the community. The first major takeaway was that there was a huge variety of opinions among both students and professors. Some students had never used AI, citing concerns about losing their own creativity and ability to think critically. There were professors who echoed similar sentiments, worrying about students losing their unique voice when writing papers, especially now with AI suggestions on grammar checkers. 

On the other hand, there were students and professors that felt that using AI as a tool improved their efficiency and freed up more time for things that were important to them. There were those who felt it was important to understand how AI worked and professors who experimented with different kinds of AI models to see if they could be used as tools. Some students started using AI to understand the industry they wanted to go into or because they wanted to use it as a tool for job applications. A common fear among students seemed to be getting left behind in the job market if they did not learn to use AI.  Plenty of people fell somewhere in the middle, trying to navigate the best way to use AI in their lives but still worrying about the effects their AI usage might have. When discussing possible motivation for AI use in academics, some students mentioned feeling pressure because of high workloads, where they had to produce a lot of work quickly. Students thought that assignments more focused on the product than the process would cause more AI usage. Professors were worried that students would turn to AI for help instead of coming to office hours or utilizing resources like the writing center. They felt that the student-professor relationship was very important and didn’t want students to rely on AI for things they previously would have relied on their professors for. Students and professors were both concerned that AI was damaging their trust in each other. Some faculty worried they would not be able to tell if something a student wrote was AI, and others did not want to feel like they had to question their students’ integrity. Students also worried their work might be mistaken for AI even when it wasn’t. These tensions made clear how beneficial open dialogue surrounding AI could be for strengthening this lost trust. 

Many students at the dialogue felt uncomfortable with the idea of going and talking to their professors about AI and appreciated the chance to communicate in a judgment free zone. Professors were very interested in hearing what the students had to say, multiple commenting that they felt the students at the dialogue were engaging with AI thoughtfully, and appreciated student insights.

In turn, students learned how professors were also facing uncertainty, and got to ask them questions about how they were navigating rapidly changing technology. They listened to faculty’s worries about how to navigate their personal feelings about AI while considering professional responsibilities to students. Everyone seemed to appreciate having an honest discussion and being able to ask each other questions without fear of judgment or punishment. Students, staff and faculty all said that they felt like AI was a taboo issue and wanted more opportunities on campus to have honest discussions about their experiences with it.

At the end of the dialogue, the small groups talked about what they needed from AI policy at Grinnell and what they thought the goals of the policy should be. Many students expressed frustration about the vagueness of current AI policies and discomfort navigating changing expectations from professors. A common thread among groups was the desire for collaboration between students and faculty to create future policy. A few groups discussed non-punitive policies that treat student use of AI as a learning opportunity. After engaging in dialogue, it became clear that neither students nor professors are a monolith in their opinions about AI. We are all trying to navigate this changing world together, and it is important to continue to have open conversations with each other about an issue that impacts all of us.

Bella Bjorklund `26 is an English and classics major, as well as a member of the Grinnell Listening Project.